Smith, R (on the application of) v Secretary of State for Defence & Anor [2010] UKSC 29 (30 June 2010)The Supreme Court of the United Kingdom has held by a 6:3 majority that the Human Rights Act 1998 (UK) has no application to members of the armed forces serving overseas when they are outside military bases.  Therefore, deaths occurring on foreign soil need not be subject to full investigation into the possibility of State failure to protect human life under art 2 of the European Convention on Human Rights.  However, deaths of military personnel on active service overseas which do occur within the jurisdiction of the United Kingdom and which appear to result from State failure should be subject to comprehensive investigation.

Department of Human Services & Department of Health (Anti-Discrimination Exemption) [2010] VCAT 1116 (29 June 2010)In this decision, McKenzie DP granted an exemption on the basis that it constitutes an appropriate special measure to reduce disadvantage caused by discrimination, as permitted by s 8(4) of the Charter.

Members of Owners Corporation on Plan of Subdivision No 441923W (Anti-Discrimination Exemption) [2010] VCAT 1111 (28 June 2010)In this decision, McKenzie DP refused to grant a proposed exemption because it was not the least restrictive means of achieving the desired outcome, contrary to s 7(2)(e) of the Charter.

Evans, R (on the application of) v Secretary of State for Defence [2010] EWHC 1445 (Admin) (25 June 2010)Ms Evans, a peace activist, sought to stop the practice of British personnel transferring detainees to the Afghan authorities by arguing the practice exposed such transferees to a real risk of torture or serious misconduct.

Coronial Investigation of 29 Level Crossing Deaths – Ruling on the Interpretation of Clause 7(1) of Schedule 1 of the Coroners Act 2008 (Vic) (25 June 2010) The Coroners Court has held that right to life under s 9 of the Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities Act requires that questions as to jurisdiction and interpretation in the Coroners Court be resolved to enable inquiries to ‘address systemic and prevention issues’.

Schalk and Kopf v Austria [2010] 30141/04 (24 June 2010)Does the right to marry, and the ‘family unit’, extend to same-sex couples?  The European Court of Human Rights recent decision in Schalk and Kopf v Austria considers these issues.

Ontario (Public Safety and Security) v Criminal Lawyers' Association, 2010 SCC 23 (17 June 2010)The Supreme Court of Canada held that the right to freedom of expression in s 2(b) of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms does not guarantee access to all documents held in government hands.  Access to documents is a derivative right of the freedom, where the denial of that access would preclude meaningful public discussion on matters of public interest.  Access may validly be denied on the basis of countervailing considerations.  In this case, those considerations were client-solicitor and law enforcement privilege.

Secretary of State for the Home Department v AP [2010] UKSC 24 (16 June 2010)A recent decision of the UK Supreme Court has confirmed that certain control order restrictions may constitute a deprivation of liberty sufficient to engage the operation of art 5 of the European Convention on Human Rights.

R v Conway, 2010 SCC 22 (11 June 2010)The Supreme Court of Canada has held that administrative tribunals with the authority to apply the law, have the jurisdiction to apply the Charter to the issues that arise in the proper exercise of their statutory functions.  It has further confirmed that tribunals should play a primary role in determining Charter issues that fall within their specialized jurisdiction and that, in exercising their statutory functions, administrative tribunals must act consistently with the Charter and its values.

Toronto Star Newspapers Ltd v Canada, 2010 SCC 21 (10 June 2010)Legislation providing for mandatory publication bans on bail application hearings was upheld by the Supreme Court of Canada as a reasonable compromise between protecting the accused person’s right to a fair trial and the right to freedom of expression.

R v National Post, 2010 SCC 16 (7 May 2010)In this case, the Canadian Supreme Court found that the guarantee of freedom of expression in s 2(b) of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms (Canadian Charter) does not create a constitutionally entrenched immunity to protect journalists against the compelled disclosure of secret sources.  The Court examined if there was nevertheless a common law privilege ‘to be applied in light of the important public interest in freedom of expression’ and found that this must be assessed on a case-by-case basis.  In this case, the Court considered that the public interest in protection of the secret source did not outweigh the public interest in the production of physical evidence of the alleged crimes.

Laxmi Mandal v Deen Dayal Harinagar Hospital & Ors [2010] 8853/2008 and Jaitun v Janpura Maternity Home & Ors [2010] 10700/2009 (High Court of Delhi, 4 June 2010)The High Court of Delhi has issued directions in response to the systemic failures resulting in the denial of benefits to two mothers below the poverty line (BPL) during their pregnancy and immediately after, in violation of the right to life contained in art 21 of the Constitution of India and international human rights obligations incorporated by the Protection of Human Rights Act 1993.