Secretary of State for the Home Department, R (on the application of) v AH [2008] EWHC 1045 (Admin) (23 April 2008)
Article 6 ECHR does not require the Secretary of State to waive the NCND policy in this case because the Secretary of State is not relying on the alleged meetings or their contents, and the controlled person is not prevented from advancing his own case about them.
- Citation
- [2008] EWHC 1045 (Admin)
- Parties
- Claimant: Secretary of State for the Home Department; Defendant: AH; Special Advocate: AH (Special Advocates)
- Jurisdiction
- England and Wales
- Judgment Date
- 23 April 2008
- Procedural Posture
- Judicial Review / Interlocutory Ruling
- Outcome
- application refused
- Legal Topics
- NCND Policy, Article 6 ECHR, Closed Material Procedures, Special Advocates, Fair Trial Rights
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Secretary of State for the Home Department
Claimant
AH
Defendant
AH (Special Advocates)
Special Advocate
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Interlocutory Ruling
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether Article 6 ECHR requires the Secretary of State to waive the NCND (Neither Confirm Nor Deny) policy regarding alleged meetings with the Security Service
- 2 Whether the controlled person is entitled to question Security Service witnesses about such meetings
Ratio Decidendi
Article 6 ECHR does not require the Secretary of State to waive the NCND policy in this case because the Secretary of State is not relying on the alleged meetings or their contents, and the controlled person is not prevented from advancing his own case about them.
Court Disposition
application refused
Orders
- Security Service witness permitted to decline to answer questions about the claimed meetings
- No formal prohibition on asking questions, but witness need not answer and advocate will not press the point
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment