Weekly Digest: 5 February 2018

6KBW

6KBW
6 February 2018

This week’s digest considers two Court of Appeal judgments and a judgment of the Divisional Court. The Court of Appeal held that the Data Retention and Investigatory Powers Act 2014 was incompatible with EU law. The court also granted permission to appeal in a case in which the claimant argues that the blanket prohibition on assisted suicide violates art 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights. The Divisional Court considered whether the defence of self-defence / defence of another is available to a charge of obstructing a constable contrary to s. 89(2) of the Police Act 1996.

Secretary of State for the Home Department v Watson [2018] EWCA Civ 70  

The judgment, which is available here, was handed down by Beatson LJ on 30 January 2018.

The Court of Appeal held that section 1 of the Data Retention and Investigatory Powers Act 2014 (‘DRIPA’) was inconsistent with EU law on the basis that it permitted access to retained data where the object sought to be achieved by that access was not restricted solely to fighting serious crime, or where access was not subject to prior review by a court or independent administrative authority.

 

R (on the application of Conway) v Secretary of State for Justice [2018] EWCA Civ 16

The judgment, which is available here, was handed down by Sir Ernest Ryder on 18 January 2018.

The Divisional Court had earlier declined to issue the declaration of incompatibility sought by the claimant that the prohibition on assisted suicide is incompatible with article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights (‘ECHR’). The Court of Appeal granted the claimant permission to appeal.

 

Oraki v Crown Prosecution Service [2018] EWHC 115 (Admin)

The judgment, which is unavailable, was handed down by Singh LJ on 17 January 2018.

The appellant was convicted of obstructing a police officer in the course of his duty contrary to s. 89(2) of the Police Act 1996, the magistrates having ruled that he was unable to plead self-defence / defence of another. The Divisional Court ruled that the defence was available as a matter of law and quashed the defendant’s conviction.

Michael Bisgrove represented the respondent.

 

R v Darren Osborne (Woolwich Crown Court 2.2.18)

The full sentencing remarks of Cheema-Grubb J are available here.

 

Justice stalwart Sir Henry Brooke dies at 81

 

Judge agrees to judicial review of ‘cab rank’ rule for unexplained deaths

John Worboys release hearing date set

>