Ayeh-Kumi v The Lord Chancellor & Anor [2021] EWHC 1564 (QB) (09 June 2021)

Ayeh-Kumi v The Lord Chancellor & Anor [2021] EWHC 1564 (QB) (09 June 2021)

A claim challenging the compatibility of primary legislation with the ECHR may be brought in the High Court under the Human Rights Act 1998 and is not necessarily an abuse of process if not brought by judicial review, provided it is not a collateral attack on specific judicial acts. The claim should not be struck out or summarily dismissed at this stage as it raises arguable issues of law and public interest, and the procedural route chosen is not fatally defective.

Citation
[2021] EWHC 1564
Parties
Claimant/respondent: Mr Charles Ayeh-Kumi; Defendants/applicants: The Lord Chancellor and Secretary of State for Justice
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
09 June 2021
Procedural Posture
Human Rights Act Claim / Public Law Challenge / Application to Strike Out or for Summary Judgment
Outcome
Application to strike out or for summary judgment refused; claim to proceed to trial on the Convention compatibility issue.
Legal Topics
Divorce, Statutory Interpretation, Rule of Law, Article 8 ECHR, Judicial Review, Declaration of Incompatibility
Family Law Human Rights Law Public Law Divorce Statutory Interpretation Rule of Law Article 8 ECHR Judicial Review +1 more

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 4 Authorities cited 15 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mr Charles Ayeh-Kumi

Claimant/respondent

The Lord Chancellor and Secretary of State for Justice

Defendants/applicants

Procedural Posture

Human Rights Act Claim / Public Law Challenge / Application to Strike Out or for Summary Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether sections 1(2)(b), 23, and 25 of the Matrimonial Causes Act 1973 are incompatible with the European Convention on Human Rights due to vagueness and lack of legal certainty
  2. 2 Whether the claim is an abuse of process for not being brought by judicial review
  3. 3 Whether the claim is out of time under the Human Rights Act 1998

Ratio Decidendi

A claim challenging the compatibility of primary legislation with the ECHR may be brought in the High Court under the Human Rights Act 1998 and is not necessarily an abuse of process if not brought by judicial review, provided it is not a collateral attack on specific judicial acts. The claim should not be struck out or summarily dismissed at this stage as it raises arguable issues of law and public interest, and the procedural route chosen is not fatally defective.

Court Disposition

Application to strike out or for summary judgment refused; claim to proceed to trial on the Convention compatibility issue.

Orders

  • Claim not struck out or summarily dismissed
  • Proceed to trial on the compatibility of the Matrimonial Causes Act 1973 with the ECHR