header-logo header-logo

02 April 2015
Issue: 7647 / Categories: Case law , Law digest , In Court
printer mail-detail

Human rights

Al-Saadoon and others v Secretary of State for Defence [2015] EWHC 715 (Admin), [2015] All ER (D) 198 (Mar)

The present case concerned the determination of preliminary issues in claims involving allegations of ill-treatment, unlawful detention and unlawful killing of Iraqi civilians by British soldiers. The Administrative Court ruled on the circumstances in which art 1 of the European Convention on Human Rights applied. It further held that an investigative duty arose where there was an arguable breach of Art 3 of the Convention and where an arguable violation of Art 5 of the Convention amounted to an enforced disappearance. An investigative obligation under Arts 2 or 3 of the Convention could not arise in circumstances where there had been no arguable substantive breach of Arts 2 or 3 of the Convention.

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Anthony Collins—20 promotions

Anthony Collins—20 promotions

20 promotions mark major people investment at national law firm, Anthony Collins

Sidley—Elaine Whiteford

Sidley—Elaine Whiteford

Sidley adds competition litigator Elaine Whiteford in London

Charles Russell Speechlys—Claudina D’Costa

Charles Russell Speechlys—Claudina D’Costa

Charles Russell Speechlys welcomes Claudina D’Costa as Director of Client Development Marketing

NEWS
The 25th Pro Bono Week begins today until 6 November, with events hosted by law firms, chambers, law schools and charities across the UK
Pro bono is celebrating a silver anniversary, with initiatives putting businesses and students at the heart of access to justice
Choosing the wrong expert can cost a clinical negligence claimant more than their case
Judges risk weakening their own independence by staying silent over government reforms, a leading public lawyer argues
A discount on damages does not automatically mean an equivalent haircut for legal costs in military deafness claims
back-to-top-scroll