Al Rawi & Ors v the Security Service & Ors (includes Order) [2010] EWHC 1496 (QB) (21 June 2010)
The extraordinary and ongoing delays in disclosure, the relevance of the Guidance documents, and the public importance of the claims require that disclosure and inspection of the 2002 and 2004 Guidance be ordered now, subject to PII review. The objections of the defendants do not outweigh the need for timely and fair resolution. If PII is claimed, a certificate must be served and a hearing fixed, with a Special Advocate appointed to assist the court.
- Citation
- [2010] EWHC 1496 (QB)
- Parties
- Claimant: Bisher Al Rawi; Claimant: Jamil El Banna; Claimant: Richard Belmar; Claimant: Omar Deghayes; Claimant: Binyam Mohamed; Claimant: Martin Mubanga; 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
- 21 June 2010
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Claim for Damages (tort, Breach of Statutory Duty, Human Rights) / Interlocutory Application for Disclosure and Related Orders
- Outcome
- Application granted
- Legal Topics
- Disclosure of Documents, Public Interest Immunity (pii), Special Advocates, Detention and Mistreatment, Human Rights Act 1998, Tort Claims Against Public Authorities
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Bisher Al Rawi
Claimant
Jamil El Banna
Claimant
Richard Belmar
Claimant
Omar Deghayes
Claimant
Binyam Mohamed
Claimant
Martin Mubanga
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 Damages (tort, Breach of Statutory Duty, Human Rights) / Interlocutory Application for Disclosure and Related Orders
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the claimants are entitled to disclosure and inspection of the 2002 and 2004 Guidance documents relating to interrogation and treatment of detainees
- 2 Whether a PII certificate should be issued and a hearing fixed if inspection is opposed on PII grounds
- 3 Whether a Special Advocate should be appointed to assist the court in the PII process
Ratio Decidendi
The extraordinary and ongoing delays in disclosure, the relevance of the Guidance documents, and the public importance of the claims require that disclosure and inspection of the 2002 and 2004 Guidance be ordered now, subject to PII review. The objections of the defendants do not outweigh the need for timely and fair resolution. If PII is claimed, a certificate must be served and a hearing fixed, with a Special Advocate appointed to assist the court.
Court Disposition
Application granted
Orders
- Defendants to disclose and permit inspection of the 2002 and 2004 Guidance documents by 10am on 9 July 2010.
- If inspection is opposed on PII grounds, a PII certificate must be lodged and served by 10am on 9 July 2010.
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