Previous 2 / 36 Next

Can Yeginsu and Anthony Jones for the Second Intervener (intervening by written submissions only) Hearing dates : 08 & 09/12/2015 --------------------- Approved Judgment

Select target paragraph3

● ● ●

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

Case Law

Country

United Kingdom

Country Location

Latitude: 52.32950805122076

Longitude: -1.4047851562500706

Country Location (linked Case Law): United Kingdom

Decision Date: 19 de jan. de 2016

Case Status: Closed

Case Outcome (Procedural)

Affirmed Lower Court

Case Outcome (Disposition)

Law or Action Overturned or Deemed Unconstitutional

Keywords

Data Protection and Retention
Media/Press
Surveillance
Terrorism

Judicial Body: Appellate Court

Case Number: 2016 EWCA Civ 6

Case Summary: David Miranda, the partner of Glenn Greenwald, the journalist renowned for breaking the Edward Snowden story, was questioned at Heathrow airport had encrypted storage devices seized under paragraph 2(1) of Schedule 7 to the Terrorism Act 2000 (“TACT”). Miranda filed a complaint arguing that this action was unlawful. The England and Wales Court of Appeal ruled that paragraph 2(1) of Schedule 7 to the Terrorism Act 2000 (“TACT”) was not compatible with Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights (“ECHR” or “Convention”) because it did not provide adequate safeguards against its arbitrary exercise.

Case Significance: The decision establishes a binding or persuasive precedent within its jurisdiction.

Source Name and URL: Columbia Global Freedom of Expression

Collection

CIPIT

Date Updated: 11 de mai. de 2024

Primary Documents

miranda-v-home-sec-judgment.pdf
English
Download View

CYRILLA: Global Digital Rights Law

Select target paragraph3

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

Primary Documents

Notifications