Article 2 Key Cases Flashcards
1
Q
Jordan v UK: facts
A
- application brought on behalf of man shot and killed by RUC
- family claimed investigation into death of their son had not been conducted properly
2
Q
Jordan v UK: principle
A
- killing was covered by Article 2 and therefore the UK had to show that the action was “no more than absolutely necessary for the purpose”
- there were issues with the investigation and inquest, it had not been a “proper and effective” investigation
- defence was not made out and UK in breach of Article 2
3
Q
McCann, Farrell & Savage v UK: facts
A
- IRA team suspected of planning bombing in Gibraltar shot by SAS officers
- soldiers had been told there was a car bomb; when they opened fire they believed IRA team were about to remotely detonate it
4
Q
McCann, Farrell & Savage v UK: principle
A
- court held soldiers were not in breach of Article 2 for their actions, but the insufficient command and control of the operation constituted a breach
- the state had failed to take alternative steps
5
Q
Osman v UK: facts
A
- schoolteacher became obsessed with schoolboy
- child’s family repeatedly advised police of their concerns
- police failed to intervene, and the teacher later attacked the boy and fatally shot his father
6
Q
Osman v UK: principle
A
- the state can be put under a positive obligation to safeguard life
- the family were unable to point to any decisive point when it became apparent that the child or his family were at risk of death
7
Q
Smith, Ellis & Allbutt v MoD: facts
A
- relatives of UK soldiers killed in Iraq claimed that MoD had provided inadequate equipment, breaching Article 2 ECHR by failing to take reasonable steps to protect the soldiers against foreseeable risk
8
Q
Smith, Ellis & Allbutt v MoD: principle
A
- the state’s armed forces deployed abroad could fall within the Court’s jurisdiction under Article 1 ECHR
- The Courts can review whether there has been a breach of Article 2 but this depends on the circumstances…
- procurement decisions might become reviewable, but some wartime decisions would not be appropriate for review by the courts
- the court could not not impose unrealistic or excessively burdensome requirements
- “combat immunity” was considered, this should be narrowly construed and did not apply to failures at the planning stage or to preparations for active combat
9
Q
Al-Skeini v UK: facts
A
- claims brought under ECHR in respect of deaths caused by British soldiers during military operations in Iraq
- was argued there was no jurisdiction under the Convention for acts which took place abroad
- an appeal was brought to ECtHR against HoL decision that the duty of investigation did not apply in foreign territories outside of Army bases
- Grand Chamber held that deaths of civilians caused by british military had to be investigated to satisfy UK’s obligations under ECHR
10
Q
Al-Skeini v UK: principle
A
- Article 1 ECHR, although not explicitly adopted by HRA, applies to UK human rights claims
- places under UK control, such as areas under military occupation count as within the jurisdiction for the purposes of the ECHR. The UK had “control and authority” over areas of Southern Iraq and had obligations to its citizens.
11
Q
Kelly & Others v UK: facts
A
- an IRA attack on a security station was ambushed by RUC and nine men killed
12
Q
Kelly & Others v UK: principle
A
- no evidence of unlawful killing, but men had their Article 2 rights breached by lack of an effective investigation
13
Q
NHS Trusts A v M: facts
A
- court was asked whether it would be lawful to withdraw treatment from someone in vegetative state
14
Q
NHS Trusts A v M: principle
A
- withdrawing treatment from someone in permanent vegetative state is not a breach of Article 2 provided that it is done on advice of clinician, in best interests of patient
15
Q
R (Amin) v SoS for Home Dep: facts
A
- Asian prisoner placed in cell with known racist who was marked as “dangerous” in his file
- file had not been checked before they were placed together
- Asian prisoner murdered
