Miranda, R (on the application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department & Ors [2016] EWCA Civ 6 (19 January 2016)

Miranda, R (on the application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department & Ors [2016] EWCA Civ 6 (19 January 2016)

The true and dominant purpose of the Schedule 7 stop was to determine whether Mr Miranda was concerned in the commission, preparation or instigation of acts of terrorism, as required by TACT. The police exercised independent judgment and were entitled to rely on Security Service intelligence. The definition of terrorism under TACT requires a mental element for actions endangering life or public safety. The interference with Article 10 rights was justified and proportionate given the national security risk, and Schedule 7 is compatible with Article 10 ECHR.

Citation
[2016] EWCA Civ 6
Parties
Appellant: David Miranda; First Respondent: Secretary of State for the Home Department; Second Respondent: Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis; Intervener: Liberty; Intervener: Article 19, English PEN and the Media Legal Defence Initiative
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
19 January 2016
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review (appeal) / Court of Appeal (civil Division) – Appeal From Divisional Court
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Terrorism Act 2000 – Schedule 7, Freedom of Expression – Article 10 ECHR, Proportionality, Journalistic Material, Police Powers at Ports, Definition of Terrorism
Public Law Human Rights Law National Security Law Terrorism Act 2000 – Schedule 7 Freedom of Expression – Article 10 ECHR Proportionality Journalistic Material Police Powers at Ports +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 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

David Miranda

Appellant

Secretary of State for the Home Department

First Respondent

Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis

Second Respondent

Liberty

Intervener

Article 19, English PEN and the Media Legal Defence Initiative

Intervener

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review (appeal) / Court of Appeal (civil Division) – Appeal From Divisional Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Schedule 7 stop of Mr Miranda was for a lawful purpose under the Terrorism Act 2000
  2. 2 Whether the stop was a disproportionate interference with Article 10 ECHR rights
  3. 3 Whether the definition of terrorism under TACT is overbroad and incompatible with journalistic activity

Ratio Decidendi

The true and dominant purpose of the Schedule 7 stop was to determine whether Mr Miranda was concerned in the commission, preparation or instigation of acts of terrorism, as required by TACT. The police exercised independent judgment and were entitled to rely on Security Service intelligence. The definition of terrorism under TACT requires a mental element for actions endangering life or public safety. The interference with Article 10 rights was justified and proportionate given the national security risk, and Schedule 7 is compatible with Article 10 ECHR.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • The appeal is dismissed; the Schedule 7 stop and seizure were lawful and proportionate.
  • No declaration of incompatibility with Article 10 ECHR is made.