Secretary of State for the Home Department v AF [2008] EWCA Civ 117 (22 February 2008)

Secretary of State for the Home Department v AF [2008] EWCA Civ 117 (22 February 2008)

Findings made by a judge at a previous section 3(10) hearing under the Prevention of Terrorism Act 2005 are not binding in subsequent hearings between the same parties. The judge conducting a subsequent section 3(10) hearing must independently assess the statutory criteria as at the date of the hearing, taking previous findings into account only to the extent appropriate in the circumstances. There is no general principle of apparent bias merely because a judge previously decided issues under section 3(10) adversely to a party.

Citation
[2008] EWCA Civ 117
Parties
Applicant/respondent: Secretary of State for the Home Department; Respondent/appellant: AF
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
22 February 2008
Procedural Posture
Appeal (civil) / Court of Appeal Judgment on Appeal From High Court (administrative Court)
Outcome
Appeal allowed in part
Legal Topics
Control Orders, Procedural Fairness, Article 6 ECHR, Apparent Bias, Judicial Review
Public Law Human Rights Law National Security Law Control Orders Procedural Fairness Article 6 ECHR Apparent Bias Judicial Review

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 16 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Secretary of State for the Home Department

Applicant/respondent

AF

Respondent/appellant

Procedural Posture

Appeal (civil) / Court of Appeal Judgment on Appeal From High Court (administrative Court)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether findings made by a judge at a previous section 3(10) hearing under the Prevention of Terrorism Act 2005 are binding in subsequent hearings between the same parties
  2. 2 Whether a judge who previously decided issues under section 3(10) is disqualified from adjudicating in subsequent proceedings due to apparent bias

Ratio Decidendi

Findings made by a judge at a previous section 3(10) hearing under the Prevention of Terrorism Act 2005 are not binding in subsequent hearings between the same parties. The judge conducting a subsequent section 3(10) hearing must independently assess the statutory criteria as at the date of the hearing, taking previous findings into account only to the extent appropriate in the circumstances. There is no general principle of apparent bias merely because a judge previously decided issues under section 3(10) adversely to a party.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed in part

Orders

  • Declaration in paragraph 3 of the High Court order (that previous findings are binding) set aside
  • Declaration in paragraph 2 (that prior judicial involvement does not disqualify a judge) upheld