Khaled v The Security Service & Ors [2016] EWHC 1727 (QB) (15 July 2016)

Khaled v The Security Service & Ors [2016] EWHC 1727 (QB) (15 July 2016)

Article 6 ECHR and common law do not require disclosure of evidence that would damage national security in this civil claim; 'AF (No.3)' disclosure obligations do not arise; as much as possible must be disclosed consistent with JSA 2013 and CPR 82.14(10), but no more.

Citation
[2016] EWHC 1727
Parties
Claimant: Abdulbaqi Khaled; Defendant: The Security Service; Defendant: The Secret Intelligence Service; Defendant: The Attorney General; Defendant: The Foreign and Commonwealth Office; Defendant: The Home Office
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
15 July 2016
Procedural Posture
Civil Claim for Misfeasance in Public Office and Conspiracy to Injure / Disclosure Applications Prior to Trial
Outcome
Applications for withholding disclosure and public interest immunity granted; limited redactions permitted.
Legal Topics
Disclosure Obligations, Justice and Security Act 2013, Article 6 ECHR, Public Interest Immunity, Misfeasance in Public Office, Conspiracy to Injure
Public Law Human Rights National Security Civil Procedure Disclosure Obligations Justice and Security Act 2013 Article 6 ECHR Public Interest Immunity +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 4 Authorities cited 23 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Abdulbaqi Khaled

Claimant

The Security Service

Defendant

The Secret Intelligence Service

Defendant

The Attorney General

Defendant

The Foreign and Commonwealth Office

Defendant

The Home Office

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Claim for Misfeasance in Public Office and Conspiracy to Injure / Disclosure Applications Prior to Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Article 6 ECHR or common law requires disclosure of evidence damaging to national security in a civil claim for misfeasance and conspiracy
  2. 2 Whether 'AF (No.3)' disclosure obligations apply in this context
  3. 3 Whether the statutory test for withholding material under JSA 2013 differs from public interest immunity

Ratio Decidendi

Article 6 ECHR and common law do not require disclosure of evidence that would damage national security in this civil claim; 'AF (No.3)' disclosure obligations do not arise; as much as possible must be disclosed consistent with JSA 2013 and CPR 82.14(10), but no more.

Court Disposition

Applications for withholding disclosure and public interest immunity granted; limited redactions permitted.

Orders

  • Disclosure to Claimant limited to what is consistent with JSA 2013 and CPR 82.14(10).
  • Defendants permitted to withhold sensitive material damaging to national security.