Da Silva v United Kingdom (no. 5878/08) (30 March 2016)After a young Brazilian man was mistakenly shot and killed by UK police in 2005, the Grand Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights (Court) has found that the manner in which the investigation into the shooting was conducted did not constitute a breach of the procedural duty contained in the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (Convention).  In particular, the Court concluded that the decision not to prosecute any individual officer was not due to any failing in the investigation or any unlawful acts.  Rather, it was due to the fact that the prosecutor had considered all of the facts and concluded that there was insufficient evidence against any individual officer to prosecute.

Goode v Common Equity Housing Limited (Human Rights) [2016] VCAT 93The Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities Act 2006 (Vic) (the Charter) requires public authorities to give proper consideration to, and act compatibly with, the human rights set out in the Charter. The Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal (VCAT) recently held that a registered housing association was subject to the Charter when providing social housing.

R v A2; R v KM; R v Vaziri (No. 23) [2016] NSWSC 282 (18 March 2016)The first three people in New South Wales to stand trial for female genital mutilation (FGM) related offences have been convicted and sentenced. Following a nine week trial, and a series of pre-trial applications dealing with evidentiary and procedural questions including the compellability of the child victims to give evidence for the prosecution against their mother (one of the defendants), the defendants were convicted of offences under section 45 of the Crimes Act 1900 (NSW) (the Act). Each was sentenced to 15 months’ imprisonment (with a non-parole period of 11 months) and referred for assessment as to suitability for home detention.

Abbott v Queensland Parole Board [2016] QSC 22 (24 February 2016)The Supreme Court of Queensland has set aside a decision to refuse parole to one of Australia’s most high-profile ‘high security’ prisoners, highlighting that any refusal of parole because of a prisoner’s custodial misconduct must be closely supported by evidence, rather than inferences to that effect. 

R v Jogee and Ruddock v The Queen [2016] UKSC 8; [2016] UKPC 7 (18 February 2016)It is a fundamental principle of criminal law in many jurisdictions that a person who assists or encourages another to commit a crime (an accessory) is guilty of the same offence as the principal offender. The case of Chan Wing-Siu v The Queen [1985] AC 168 introduced a new principle widening the application of the law of secondary liability whereby if two people set out to commit an offence (crime A), and in the course of that joint enterprise one of them (D1) commits another offence (crime B), the second person (D2) is nevertheless guilty as an accessory to crime B if he had foreseen the possibility that D1 might act as they did. This principle is commonly referred to as ‘parasitic accessory liability’ or ‘joint enterprise liability’.

Plaintiff M68/2015 [2016] HCA 1 (3 February 2016)In a highly anticipated decision the High Court has rejected a constitutional challenge to the Federal Government’s regional processing framework. The majority of the Court held that s198AHA of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth) (Act) authorised the Commonwealth Government’s participation in the plaintiff’s detention. This decision was made after retrospective legislation was introduced after the case was filed with retrospective operation.

R (Steinfeld and Keidan) v Secretary of State for Education [2016] EWHC 128 (Admin) (29 January 2016)The UK High Court held that the enactment of same-sex marriage legislation in 2013 did not render restrictions on opposite-sex couples entering into civil partnerships incompatible with the European Convention of Human Rights.

First Nations Child and Family Caring Society of Canada et al. v Attorney General of Canada [2016] CHRT 2 (26 January 2016)In a significant decision handed down by the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal, it was found that the Canadian Government discriminated against First Nations children and families living on reserve and in the Yukon Territory by failing to provide them with equitable child welfare services.

Opinion No. 54/2015 concerning Julian Assange (Sweden and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland), distributed 22 January 2016

Re: Carla (Medical Procedure) [2016] FamCA 7The Family Court in Queensland made an order authorising the parents of a five year old girl to consent to her undergoing certain medical procedures, including a gonadectomy, and held that court authorisation of this medical treatment was unnecessary. This case raises serious human rights implications about oversight of medical treatment on intersex children in Australia.

Regina (David Miranda) v Secretary of State for the Home Department; Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis [2016] EWCA Civ 6The UK Court of Appeal has upheld the exercise of a police power under Schedule 7 of the Terrorism Act 2000 (UK) (the Act) to stop and question a person to determine whether they are or have been 'concerned in the commission, preparation or instigation of acts of terrorism'. Importantly, the Court has also declared that Schedule 7 is incompatible with the right to freedom of expression under article 10 of the European Convention of Human Rights (the Convention), insofar as it applies to journalistic material.