Kaplan, R (on the application of) v Appeal Adjudicator, Enemy Property Claims Assessment Panel & Anor [2004] EWHC 485 (Admin) (15 March 2004)

Kaplan, R (on the application of) v Appeal Adjudicator, Enemy Property Claims Assessment Panel & Anor [2004] EWHC 485 (Admin) (15 March 2004)

The claimant was not entitled to an uplift or interest under either the Baltic States Scheme or the EPPS because the schemes did not provide for such payments, the persecution suffered was not 'Nazi persecution' as required by the EPPS, and the claims were settled in full in 1971. The court could not interfere with the executive's decision not to pay interest or uplift, and the Human Rights Act 1998 and ECHR did not apply retrospectively to these facts.

Citation
[2004] EWHC 485 (Admin)
Parties
Claimant: Jacob Kaplan; 1st Defendant: Appeal Adjudicator, Enemy Property Claims Assessment Panel; 2nd Defendant: Department of Trade and Industry
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
15 March 2004
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / High Court Judgment and Application for Permission to Appeal
Outcome
Application dismissed; permission to appeal refused.
Legal Topics
Enemy Property, Compensation Schemes, Judicial Review, Nazi Persecution, Retrospective Legislation, Human Rights Act 1998, Article 1 Protocol 1 ECHR
Administrative Law Human Rights Law Property Law Enemy Property Compensation Schemes Judicial Review Nazi Persecution Retrospective Legislation +2 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 3 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Jacob Kaplan

Claimant

Appeal Adjudicator, Enemy Property Claims Assessment Panel

1st Defendant

Department of Trade and Industry

2nd Defendant

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / High Court Judgment and Application for Permission to Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claimant is entitled to an uplift or interest on sums confiscated and later returned under the Baltic States Scheme or the Enemy Property Payments Scheme (EPPS)
  2. 2 Whether the confiscation and non-payment of interest is compatible with Article 1 Protocol 1 ECHR
  3. 3 Whether the persecution suffered was 'Nazi persecution' within the meaning of the EPPS

Ratio Decidendi

The claimant was not entitled to an uplift or interest under either the Baltic States Scheme or the EPPS because the schemes did not provide for such payments, the persecution suffered was not 'Nazi persecution' as required by the EPPS, and the claims were settled in full in 1971. The court could not interfere with the executive's decision not to pay interest or uplift, and the Human Rights Act 1998 and ECHR did not apply retrospectively to these facts.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed; permission to appeal refused.

Orders

  • Application for judicial review dismissed.
  • Permission to appeal refused.