Reasons to be hopeful?

The traditional view is that in general there is no such obligation. The situations in which reasons are necessary are exceptions to the norm. An alternative argument is that what were once seen as exceptional requirements to give reasons are, in truth, examples of the norm. It is those situations in which reasons are not required that are, in fact, exceptional. In the pre-Human Rights Act case of Stefan v General Medical Council [1999] 1 WLR 1293 this alternative argument was described by the Privy Council (per Lord Clyde at p. 1301) as a "strong" one, and one which might need to be considered later, through the lens of article 6 of the ECHR (once in force), in a wide-reaching review... Read on

Convention Obligations in 'foreign cases'

When does the ECHR prohibit the return of a foreign national to a state where her convention rights are liable to be breached? Two recent judgments have considered the stringency of Convention obligations in such ‘foreign cases’: N v UK, no. 26565/05, and EM (Lebanon) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2008] UKHL 64... Read on

T-Mobile and O2 v Ofcom

Public lawyers have long accepted that judicial review is a supervisory not appellate jurisdiction, concerned with the legality of administrative decisions rather than their substantive merits. Regarding challenges to Ofcom decisions under EC law, however, the Court of Appeal has now confirmed that recourse to judicial review is capable of constituting a “right of appeal” to a tribunal of “appropriate expertise” whereby “the merits of the case are duly taken into account”... Read on