AN v Secretary of State for the Home Department; AE & AF v Secretary of State for the Home Department

The Court of Appeal has held that Control Orders made by the Secretary of State on the basis of an erroneous understanding of the law, and the reach of Article 6 of the European Convention, fall to be quashed ab initio. The Court reached this conclusion on the basis of ordinary judicial review principles and the particular construction of the Prevention of Terrorism Act 2005. The result is that any prosecutions brought on the basis of alleged breach of such Orders would fail and that the controlled persons may be entitled to claim damages at common law and pursuant to the Human Rights Act 1998 for the interference with their liberty while the subject of such Control Orders. The Secretary of State has sought permission to appeal to the Supreme Court.

Dinah Rose QC appeared for AN, Timothy Otty QC appeared for AE and AF; Tom Hickman appeared for AF (led by Timothy Otty QC). James Eadie QC appeared for the Secretary of State for the Home Department.