ECHR - Cases

Question 1

Which Article of the ECHR does Golder v UK relate to?

Answer 1

Article 6
Right to a fair trial

Question 2

Which Article of the ECHR does Tyrer v UK relate to?

Answer 2

Article 3
Freedom from torture

Question 3

Which Article of the ECHR does Handyside v UK relate to?

Answer 3

Article 10
Freedom of expression

Question 4

Which Article of the ECHR does Pretty v UK relate to?

Answer 4

Article 8
Right to respect for private and family life

Question 5

Golder v UK (1975)

Answer 5

Golder was sentenced to 15 years in prison. He was denied a solicitor by Prison Rules 1964.

ECtHR: found in favour of Golder - this violated Article 6 ECHR: the right to a fair hearing.

Question 5

Tyrer v UK (1978)

Answer 5

Tyrer was sentenced to 3 strokes of birch. He argued this was a violation of Article 3: freedom from torture.

ECtHR: this WAS a violation of Article 3.

Question 6

Handyside v UK (1979)

Answer 6

Little Red Schoolbook’s author (Handyside) was prosecuted on a charge of obscenity (domestically). He argued this was contrary to Article 10.

ECtHR: gave domestic courts a WIDE margin of appreciation, so found in favour of the UK.

Question 7

Pretty v UK (2002)

Answer 7

Pretty had motor neurones disease and wanted husband to assist her suicide. She argued UK’s blanket ban on assisted suicide violated Article 8.

ECtHR: held UK was within its margin of appreciation to have a blanket ban on assisted suicide (ensuring

Question 8

Hirst v UK (No.2) (2005)

Answer 8

Prisoners’ denied the right to vote argued this violated Article 3, Protocol 1 ECHR.

ECtHR: held blanket ban DID violate Article 3, Protocol 1 ECHR. Exercised a more narrow margin of appreciation to protect this right.

Question 9

Chahal v UK (1996)

Answer 9

Detainment and planned deportation of Chahal based on national security concerns was argued by Chahal to be contrary to Article 3 if he was deported.

ECtHR: held that despite wide margin of appreciation, ECHR held it WOULD be unlawful to deport per Article 3 as this would risk compromising an absolute right.

Question 10

Which Article of the ECHR does Hirst v UK (No.2) (2005) relate to?

Answer 10

Article 3 Protocol 1 ECHR

Question 11

Which Article of the ECHR does Chahal v UK (1996) relate to?

Answer 11

Article 3
Freedom from torture

Question 12

Ireland v UK (1978) establishes…

Answer 12

That there is a distinction between torture and inhuman and degrading treatment.

Torture = most severe.

Question 13

Which Article of the ECHR does AP, Garçon and Nicot relate to?

Answer 13

Article 8
Right to respect for private and family life

Question 14

Is torture or inhuman and degrading treatment more severe?

Source?

Answer 14

Torture is more severe.

Ireland v UK (1978)

Question 15

Cruz Varas v Sweden establishes that the standard of proof in expulsion cases requires…

Answer 15

‘Substantial grounds for believing in the existence of a real risk of treatment contrary to Article 3.’

Question 16

Soering v UK establishes (in expulsion cases) that the burden of proving a breach of Article 3 lies with?…

Answer 16

The STATE to prove that deportation will NOT expose the expelled person to a breach of Article 3 in the state they are deported to.

Question 17

In the context of expulsion cases, Chahal v UK (1996) establishes…

Answer 17

That national interests (prevention of terrorism) CANNOT override the interests of individuals (and freedom from torture under Article 3).

Question 18

Ilias v Hungary (2020) establishes that…

Answer 18

A state cannot remove an individual asylum seeker without determining their asylum claim first, UNLESS it has been established that their claim will receive proper consideration in a safe third country.

Question 19

NSK v UK (2022)

Answer 19

Claim taken to ECtHR that UK’s Rwanda Policy and concerns around procedure.

Result: ECtHR issued a Rule 39 Interim Measure on 14th June 2022, preventing refoulement of asylum seekers from UK -> Rwanda.