Miranda v Secretary of State for the Home Department & Ors [2014] EWHC 255 (Admin) (19 February 2014)

Miranda v Secretary of State for the Home Department & Ors [2014] EWHC 255 (Admin) (19 February 2014)

The Schedule 7 stop was lawfully exercised for the statutory purpose of determining whether the claimant appeared to be concerned in the commission, preparation or instigation of acts of terrorism. The purpose was supported by evidence and authorisation at multiple levels. The interference with freedom of expression was justified and proportionate in the interests of national security, given the nature and volume of classified material at risk. Schedule 7 is not incompatible with Article 10 ECHR.

Citation
[2014] EWHC 255 (Admin)
Parties
Claimant: David Miranda; 1st Defendant: The Secretary of State for the Home Department; 2nd Defendant: The Commissioner of the Police of the Metropolis; Intervener: Liberty; Intervener: English Pen, Article 19 & Media Legal Defence Initiative; Intervener: Coalition of Media & Free Speech Organisations
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
19 February 2014
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Substantive Hearing After Permission Granted
Outcome
Claim dismissed
Legal Topics
Terrorism Act 2000, Schedule 7 Powers, Freedom of Expression, Proportionality, Journalistic Material, Article 10 ECHR
Public Law Human Rights Law National Security Law Terrorism Act 2000 Schedule 7 Powers Freedom of Expression Proportionality Journalistic Material +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 13 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

David Miranda

Claimant

The Secretary of State for the Home Department

1st Defendant

The Commissioner of the Police of the Metropolis

2nd Defendant

Liberty

Intervener

English Pen, Article 19 & Media Legal Defence Initiative

Intervener

Coalition of Media & Free Speech Organisations

Intervener

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / Substantive Hearing After Permission Granted

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the use of Schedule 7 powers under the Terrorism Act 2000 to detain and question the claimant was for a proper statutory purpose
  2. 2 Whether the use of Schedule 7 powers was a disproportionate interference with the right to freedom of expression under Article 10 ECHR
  3. 3 Whether Schedule 7 powers are incompatible with Article 10 ECHR

Ratio Decidendi

The Schedule 7 stop was lawfully exercised for the statutory purpose of determining whether the claimant appeared to be concerned in the commission, preparation or instigation of acts of terrorism. The purpose was supported by evidence and authorisation at multiple levels. The interference with freedom of expression was justified and proportionate in the interests of national security, given the nature and volume of classified material at risk. Schedule 7 is not incompatible with Article 10 ECHR.

Court Disposition

Claim dismissed

Orders

  • Permission to seek judicial review granted
  • Claim for judicial review dismissed