Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.
Results update automatically as you type.
England and Wales decisions
Decisions matching the current search
The Court of Appeal refused renewed leave to appeal by Anjem Choudary and Khaled Hussein in a terrorism case, upholding evidential rulings and sentences.
The UK Supreme Court held that section 12(1A) of the Terrorism Act 2000 is compatible with article 10 and dismissed appeals in two terrorism-expression cases.
Henegan, R. v [2025] EWCA Crim 1753 (02 December 2025)
The Court of Appeal Criminal Division refused leave to appeal out of time against conviction and sentence, and dismissed a bid to rely on fresh evidence.
The offence under s.12(1A) Terrorism Act 2000 does not require proof of knowledge of proscription; the statutory ingredients themselves strike the proportionality balance for Article 10 ECHR, and no proportionality direction is required for the jury. The offence is compatible with Articles 7 and 10 ECHR.
Source excerpt
The appeal succeeds in part because the methodology of supplementing keyword searches with manual review was appropriate given the complexity and nature of the evidence, and the claim for consideration of unused material was substantiated by contemporaneous correspondence showing timely disclosure. The court allowed 190 hours for special preparation and 80 hours for consideration of unused material, balancing the evidence and submissions against the Determining Officer's findings.
Source excerpt
Shikhey, Application for Reconsideration [2025] PBRA 190 (05 September 2025)
The Parole Board refused reconsideration of a non-release decision, finding no irrationality or procedural unfairness in the oral panel’s assessment of risk and evidence.
Chinyanga, Application for Reconsideration by, [2025] PBRA 133 (30 June 2025)
The Parole Board refused reconsideration of a release decision, finding no procedural unfairness, bias, or failure to consider the applicant’s relevant evidence.
Niinemae, R. v [2025] EWCA Crim 984 (24 June 2025)
The Court of Appeal reduced Daniel Niinemae’s sentence for possessing a terrorist manual, holding the handbook was capable of usefulness but not specific terrorist instructions.
The UK Supreme Court held that construing the meaning of a defence statement in this case was a question of fact, not law, and dismissed the appeal.
The statutory conditions for a notification order under section 57 and Schedule 4 of the Counter-Terrorism Act 2008 are satisfied; there is no evidence of a flagrant denial of fair trial; the sentence was imposed after the relevant commencement; and the defendant remains a risk to national security. The court is therefore required to make the order.
Source excerpt
Explore more
