Home Office v Tariq

Home Office v Tariq

Closed material procedures and special advocate arrangements in employment tribunal discrimination cases involving national security are compatible with EU law and Article 6 ECHR. There is no absolute requirement for 'gisting' of allegations to the claimant in all civil cases; the necessity for disclosure depends on the nature of the case and the balance between national security and procedural fairness. The procedures adopted provide sufficient safeguards, and the tribunal retains discretion to review disclosure throughout proceedings.

Parties
Appellant/respondent: Home Office; Respondent/appellant: Tariq
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
13 July 2011
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Judgment
Outcome
Home Office appeal allowed; Tariq cross-appeal dismissed.
Legal Topics
Closed Material Procedure, Special Advocate, Discrimination, Security Vetting, Fair Trial, European Convention on Human Rights, EU Law Compliance
Employment Law Human Rights Law Equality Law National Security Closed Material Procedure Special Advocate Discrimination Security Vetting +3 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 21 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Home Office

Appellant/respondent

Tariq

Respondent/appellant

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Is the closed material procedure in employment tribunal proceedings compatible with EU law and the European Convention on Human Rights?
  2. 2 Does Article 6 ECHR require 'gisting' of allegations to the claimant in all civil cases, including national security vetting?
  3. 3 Are special advocate procedures sufficient to counterbalance restrictions on disclosure in national security cases?

Ratio Decidendi

Closed material procedures and special advocate arrangements in employment tribunal discrimination cases involving national security are compatible with EU law and Article 6 ECHR. There is no absolute requirement for 'gisting' of allegations to the claimant in all civil cases; the necessity for disclosure depends on the nature of the case and the balance between national security and procedural fairness. The procedures adopted provide sufficient safeguards, and the tribunal retains discretion to review disclosure throughout proceedings.

Court Disposition

Home Office appeal allowed; Tariq cross-appeal dismissed.

Orders

  • Declaration requiring 'gisting' of allegations to claimant set aside.
  • Closed material procedure and special advocate process upheld as lawful.