text stringlengths 1 6.02k | cluster_id int32 0 7 |
|---|---|
FIRST SECTION
CASE OF DZHURAYEV v. RUSSIA
(Application no. 38124/07)
JUDGMENT
STRASBOURG
17 December 2009
FINAL
28/06/2010
This judgment has become final under Article 44 § 2 of the Convention. It may be subject to editorial revision.
In the case of Dzhurayev v. Russia,
T... | 2 |
specified. It was not mentioned whether the decision could be appealed against. On the same day the applicant was placed in remand prison SIZO-77/4, Moscow.
14. On 12 February 2007 the applicant applied to the Russian Prosecutor General's Office. He asked it to refuse the request of the Uzbek Prosecutor General's Off... | 0 |
eight hours (Article 22 § 2).
2. Code of Criminal Procedure
33. The term “court” is defined by the Code of Criminal Procedure (CCP) of 2002 as “any court of general jurisdiction which examines a criminal case on the merits and delivers decisions provided for by this Code” (Article 5 § 48). The term “judge” is defined... | 5 |
-O of 11 July 2006 on the Prosecutor General's request for clarification
44. The Prosecutor General asked the Constitutional Court for an official clarification of its decision no. 101-O of 4 April 2006 (see above), for the purpose, in particular, of elucidating the procedure for extending a person's detention with a ... | 5 |
, the Court considers that the issue of exhaustion of domestic remedies is closely linked to the merits of the applicant's complaint under Article 5 § 4 of the Convention. Thus, the Court finds it necessary to join the Government's objection to the merits of this complaint. The Court further notes that the applicant's ... | 5 |
the CCP could have been applied in the applicant's case as suggested by the Government.
62. In such circumstances the Court concludes that the Government failed to show that the existence of the remedies invoked was sufficiently certain both in theory and in practice and, accordingly, that these remedies lack the req... | 5 |
by Chapter 13 of the CCP, among other provisions.
72. In such circumstances the Court considers that, in order to be “lawful” within the meaning of Article 5 § 1 (f) of the Convention, the applicant's detention should be compatible not only with the requirements of Article 466 § 2 but also with the provisions governi... | 6 |
. Declares the application admissible;
3. Holds that there has been a violation of Article 5 § 4 of the Convention;
4. Holds that there has been a violation of Article 5 § 1 of the Convention;
5. Holds
(a) that the respondent State is to pay the applicant, within three months from the date on which the judgm... | 4 |
THIRD SECTION
CASE OF TOPEKHIN v. RUSSIA
(Application no. 78774/13)
JUDGMENT
STRASBOURG
10 May 2016
FINAL
17/10/2016
This judgment has become final under Article 44 § 2 of the Convention. It may be subject to editorial revision.
In the case of Topekhin v. Russia,
The Eu... | 2 |
District Court.
14. On 13 November 2013 the City Court upheld the detention order of 13 September 2013, endorsing the District Court’s reasoning. After examining medical evidence pertaining to the applicant’s health, it found that the illnesses he suffered from were not severe enough to warrant his release.
15. On a... | 0 |
not significantly. The paraplegia remained unchanged. He was discharged from hospital on 9 December 2013 to undergo treatment in a civilian hospital and to check whether his state of health called for his early release.
30. From 9 to 13 December 2013 the applicant stayed in Moscow City Hospital no. 20, where he under... | 0 |
On the morning of 6 March 2014 the applicant was taken in the same prison van to correctional colony no. IK-15/1 (“the correctional colony”). The trip took around an hour.
44. The parties disagreed whether the vehicles used to transfer the applicant, with the exception of the Gazel minivan, were equipped to accommoda... | 0 |
, administrative, judicial or other measures to prevent persons with disabilities, on an equal basis with others, from being subjected to torture or cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.”
The requirements regulating personal mobility are laid down in Article 20, which reads as follows:
“States Parties sh... | 1 |
population. Structural alterations should be effected to assist the wheelchair-bound and handicapped on lines similar to those in the outside environment....”
58. Recommendation CM/Rec (2012) 5 of the Committee of Ministers of 12 April 2012 on the European Code of Ethics for Prison Staff, provides, in particular:
IV.... | 0 |
26772/95, § 119, ECHR 2000-IV). Ill‑treatment must, however, attain a minimum level of severity if it is to fall within the scope of Article 3. The assessment of this minimum is relative: it depends on all the circumstances of the case, such as the duration of the treatment, its physical and mental effects and, in som... | 5 |
notes that the applicant, a seriously ill person suffering from paraplegia and a number of related conditions, including serious bowel and bladder dysfunctions, was detained from 16 July 2013 to 18 August 2014. He argued that his health had significantly deteriorated in detention, as a result of the authorities’ failu... | 0 |
special needs resulting from his disability (see Z.H. v. Hungary, no. 28937/11, § 29, 8 November 2012; Jasinskis v. Latvia, no. 45744/08, § 59, 21 December 2010; and Farbtuhs v. Latvia, no. 4672/02, § 56, 2 December 2004).
80. In the above-cited case of Farbtuhs, the Court noted that the prison authorities had permit... | 5 |
is evident that his inmates were unable to provide such enhanced assistance, which requires special skills and knowledge. This fact is accentuated by the presence of bedsores, developed outside the hospital, which were recorded by the resident doctor and noted by the independent medical expert as a sign of neglect on ... | 0 |
find any evidence that the conditions on the train or in the van were in any way different from those during the first part of his trip.
94. In these circumstances, the Court takes the view that the cumulative effect of the material conditions of the applicant’s transfer, and the duration of the trip, were serious en... | 5 |
to the detained person in such matters is tantamount to overturning the rule of Article 5 of the Convention, a provision which makes detention an exceptional departure from the right to liberty and one that is only permissible in exhaustively enumerated and strictly defined cases (see Rokhlina v. Russia, no. 54071/00,... | 5 |
the Court accepts that those developments decreased the risk of him absconding, the risk was not entirely eliminated given his resourcefulness both when it came to his financial situation and his ability to organise his escape, including through the forgery of official documents. The Court therefore accepts that the R... | 5 |
that those expenses had indeed been incurred.
122. According to the Court’s case-law, an applicant is entitled to the reimbursement of costs and expenses only in so far as it has been shown that these have been actually and necessarily incurred and are reasonable as to quantum. In the present case, regard being had t... | 6 |
FOURTH SECTION
CASE OF RUPA AND ŢOMPI v. ROMANIA
(Application no. 60272/09)
JUDGMENT
STRASBOURG
2 May 2017
This judgment is final but it may be subject to editorial revision.
In the case of Rupa and Ţompi v. Romania,
The European Court of Human Rights (Fourt... | 2 |
on him leaving town. He said that he had already been detained for 180 days and therefore the initial reasons for extending his detention no longer applied. He also submitted that he had had time to understand the consequences of his criminal behaviour and had changed. The second applicant and the first applicant’s un... | 5 |
s pre‑trial detention had been duly reasoned, providing replies to all the arguments raised by the first applicant and his lawyer.
26. The Government also contended that the domestic authorities had handled the case with diligence. A bill of indictment had been issued four months after the first applicant had been rem... | 5 |
job between 1 October 2009 and 17 June 2010 (when his conviction was upheld by the appellate court). He also claimed EUR 71,336 in respect of non-pecuniary damage.
39. The Government argued that there was no causal link between the alleged violation and the loss of salary claimed by the first applicant. Moreover, the... | 6 |
SECOND SECTION
CASE OF DİRİ v. TURKEY
(Application no. 68351/01)
JUDGMENT
STRASBOURG
31 July 2007
FINAL
31/10/2007
This judgment will become final in the circumstances set out in Article 44 § 2 of the Convention. It may be subject to editorial revision.
In the case of Diri v. Turk... | 2 |
According to the applicant, as he refused to stand up and shout his name during the daily headcounts, he was subjected to ill-treatment by the prison guards, in particular falaka (beating on the soles of the feet).
11. On 24 February 2001 and 3 March 2001, respectively, the applicant was examined by the prison doctor... | 0 |
li Assize Court could not be issued in the circumstances of the present case.
22. On 30 November 2001 the Forensic Medicine Institute replied that the findings mentioned in the bone scintigraphy report could not have resulted from rheumatism or the hunger strike, but were caused by a trauma.
23. On 7 December 2001 th... | 0 |
meaning of Article 35 § 3 of the Convention. It further notes that it is not inadmissible on any other grounds. It must therefore be declared admissible.
2. Merits
a) The alleged ill-treatment
i. General principles
35. The Court reiterates that Article 3 of the Convention ranks as one of the most fundamental prov... | 0 |
that he had been subjected to falaka in the Tekirdağ F-Type Prison. As clearly indicated in these reports, the injuries to the applicant's feet could not have been caused by rheumatism or the result of his hunger strike. They could only have been sustained by trauma. The Court takes note of the Government's observatio... | 0 |
and 22948/93, § 55 and § 118, ECHR 2000‑X). In the instant case, the medical reports dated 3 and 8 March 2001, which were drafted by the prison's own doctor, provided limited medical information and did not include any explanation by the applicant as regards his complaints.
51. The Court also finds it noteworthy that... | 6 |
examine separately the complaint under Article 13 of the Convention;
5. Holds
(a) that the respondent State is to pay the applicant, within three months from the date on which the judgment becomes final in accordance with Article 44 § 2 of the Convention, the following amounts to be converted into New Turkish lira... | 4 |
SECOND SECTION
CASE OF ERDŐS v. HUNGARY
(Application no. 38937/97)
JUDGMENT
STRASBOURG
9 April 2002
FINAL
09/07/2002
This judgment will become final in the circumstances set out in Article 44 § 2 of the Convention. It may be subject to editorial revision.
In the case of Erdős v. ... | 2 |
7 December 1992 the plaintiff again extended his action and, on 27 January 1993, he filed a memorandum with the Regional Court submitting the precise figures of his claims.
17. On 17 February and 28 April 1993 the Regional Court held hearings. The hearings scheduled for 1 September and 10 December 1993 and 9 March 19... | 3 |
supplement his claims – which contributed decisively to the slowing down of the proceedings. The applicant maintained, on the contrary, that his father had shown due diligence.
34. The Court points out that only delays attributable to the State may justify a finding of a failure to comply with the “reasonable time” r... | 6 |
2 and 3 of the Rules of Court.
S. DolléJ.-P. CostaRegistrarPresident
In accordance with Article 45 § 2 of the Convention and Rule 74 § 2 of the Rules of Court, the following opinions are annexed to this judgment:
(a) Concurring opinion of Judge Loucaides;
(b) Dissenting opinion of Judge Mularoni.
J.-P.C.S.D.CO... | 3 |
time elapsed after this date, account must be taken of the then state of the proceedings” (see, among other authorities, Foti and others v. Italy judgment of 10 December 1982, Series A no. 56, p. 18, § 53), it seems to me that the delays were largely attributable to the plaintiff’s conduct.
We know from the facts that... | 3 |
s conduct.
For all these reasons, I conclude that the length of the proceedings did not exceed the “reasonable time” requirement and that the applicant’s rights under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention have not been violated.
| 5 |
FIRST SECTION
CASE OF EMMER-REISSIG v. AUSTRIA
(Application no. 11032/04)
JUDGMENT
STRASBOURG
10 May 2007
FINAL
10/08/2007
This judgment will become final in the circumstances set out in Article 44 § 2 of the Convention. It may be subject to editorial revision.
In the case of Emmer-... | 2 |
Gebiets-bauamt) on 31 October 2001. It stated that by far the largest part of the land was covered by forest, which would impede serious agricultural activities. With reference to the earlier decisions, it repeated that, judging by its design and shape, the building at issue would be untypical of an agricultural shed a... | 3 |
see Eisenstecken v. Austria, no. 29477/95, § 29, ECHR 2000-X), the applicant was in principle entitled to a public hearing before the first and only tribunal examining his case, unless there were exceptional circumstances which justified dispensing with such a hearing (see, for instance, Stojakovic v. Austria, no. 3000... | 3 |
THIRD SECTION
CASE OF DORAN v. IRELAND
(Application no. 50389/99)
JUDGMENT
STRASBOURG
31 July 2003
FINAL
31/10/2003
This judgment will become final in the circumstances set out in Article 44 § 2 of the Convention. It may be subject to editorial revision.
In the case of ... | 2 |
1993. On that date there was no judge available and the matter was heard on 7 October 1993 when the President of the High Court (“the trial judge”) made himself available.
The Government maintained that the trial judge was advised by counsel present that the hearing required two days, that the judge had notified the p... | 5 |
On 17 July 1996 the applicants issued two motions. The first sought the comments of the vendors' solicitors on the note of evidence and the second requested that the vendors' appeal be struck out for “want of prosecution” since the vendors had not filed documents in their appeal.
20. On 26 July 1996 the Supreme Court... | 5 |
29. The vendors' solicitors filed an amended defence in May 1998 and the applicants filed further particulars of damage in June 1998. On 26 June 1998 the vendors' solicitors made a late lodgement into court in the sum of 85,000 Irish pounds (IR£). The applicants objected. A letter dated 13 July 1998 from the Attorney... | 5 |
, if he is not already a party.
2. If any question as to the interpretation of the Constitution, other than a question referred to in rule 1, shall arise in any action or matter, the party having carriage of the proceedings shall, if the Court so directs, serve notice upon the Attorney General.
3. Such notice shall s... | 5 |
ors) had been definitively established by the Supreme Court (and, in the end, their appeal to the Supreme Court was successful). They believed that it was the defendants' responsibility to ensure the presence of a stenographer and, in any event, the finalising of the note of evidence thereafter by the trial judge was u... | 5 |
Once the Supreme Court directed the trial judge to settle the note of evidence, they vigorously pursued the trial judge's settlement of the note (see paragraphs 21-24 above).
The Court has also had regard to the applicants' timely completion of their submissions and their numerous motions to the court to ensure the de... | 5 |
, High Court, 7 July 1994, at p. 10, and Kennedy v. Ireland [1987] IR 587, at 593).
51. The first constitutional ground which the applicants could have invoked was the principle of “constitutional justice”. The Government submitted that the courts have recognised that the unenumerated rights guaranteed by Article 40(3... | 3 |
adequate nature of the remedy can be undermined by its excessive duration (Tomé Mota v. Portugal (dec.), no. 32082/96, ECHR 1999‑IX, and Paulino Tomás, cited above).
58. The effectiveness of a remedy within the meaning of Article 13 does not depend on the certainty of a favourable outcome for the applicant. Nor does ... | 3 |
)(1) of the Constitution (as referred to but not applied in the above-cited McNeill case) and even assuming that such a complaint could be raised at any time (The State (Shatter, Gallagher & Co. v. de Valera cited above), the Court does not consider that it has been demonstrated that the remedy to which the Government ... | 5 |
CONVENTION
70. Article 41 of the Convention provides:
“If the Court finds that there has been a violation of the Convention or the Protocols thereto, and if the internal law of the High Contracting Party concerned allows only partial reparation to be made, the Court shall, if necessary, afford just satisfaction to th... | 6 |
EUR 500 in respect of time lost by them in preparing their extensive submissions to the Court.
78. The Government indicated that they had no comments on this claim of the applicants.
79. The Court finds that the sum claimed in respect of the actual expenses incurred by the applicants in pursuing their Convention com... | 6 |
FIFTH SECTION
CASE OF PETERMANN v. GERMANY
(Application no. 901/05)
JUDGMENT
STRASBOURG
25 March 2010
This judgment is final but it may be subject to editorial revision
In the case of Petermann v. Germany,
The European Court of Human Rights (Fifth Section), sitting as ... | 2 |
the Social Court granted the applicant legal aid.
16. On 13 January 1994 Bi., a neurological and psychiatric expert appointed by the court on 23 July 1993, submitted his report. He diagnosed the applicant as suffering from post-traumatic stress caused by the attack in 1985 and estimated the total loss of his earning ... | 3 |
cost of the report.
36. On 6 February 2002 the applicant informed the court that he now had the money needed and that he could make a bank transfer covering costs.
37. On 6 June 2002 the Social Court of Appeal appointed expert Ke.
38. On 16 July 2002 the applicant made an additional payment of costs at the expert's... | 3 |
OLATION OF ARTICLE 6 § 1 OF THE CONVENTION
51. The applicant complained that the length of the proceedings before the Social Courts concerning his pension claim had been incompatible with the “reasonable time” requirement, laid down in Article 6 § 1 of the Convention, which reads as follows:
“In the determination of h... | 3 |
mutatis mutandis, Glüsen, cited above, § 83). The said provision also does not exempt the domestic courts from the obligation to ensure compliance with the “reasonable time” requirement (see, inter alia, Vaas v. Germany, no. 20271/05, § 68, 26 March 2009).
58. Furthermore, the Court observes that in the proceedings t... | 6 |
. Default interest
71. The Court considers it appropriate that the default interest should be based on the marginal lending rate of the European Central Bank, to which should be added three percentage points.
FOR THESE REASONS, THE COURT UNANIMOUSLY
1. Declares the complaint concerning the excessive length of the pr... | 6 |
THIRD SECTION
CASE OF MOMČILOVIĆ AND OTHERS v. SERBIA
(Applications nos. 16254/08 and 2 others – see appended list)
JUDGMENT
STRASBOURG
5 December 2017
This judgment is final but it may be subject to editorial revision.
In the case of Momčilović and Others v. Se... | 2 |
The Government’s objection concerning the alleged abuse of the right of petition
10. The Government submitted that the second applicant’s lawyer intentionally hid from the Court that the applicant had passed away during the proceedings, amounting to an abuse of the right of petition, within the meaning of Article 35 ... | 3 |
. The applicants’ victim status then depends on whether the redress afforded to them was adequate and sufficient having regard to just satisfaction as provided for under Article 41 of the Convention (see Dubjaková v. Slovakia (dec.), no. 67299/01, 19 October 2004).
22. In this connection, the Court recalls that in no... | 3 |
the applications;
2. Decides to join to the merits the Government’s preliminary objection as to the applicants’ victim status, and dismisses it;
3. Declares the applications admissible;
4. Holds that there has been a violation of Article 6 § 1 of the Convention in respect of each applicant;
5. Holds that t... | 4 |
SECOND SECTION
CASE OF MEHMET AND SUNA YİĞİT v. TURKEY
(Application no. 52658/99)
JUDGMENT
STRASBOURG
17 July 2007
FINAL
17/10/2007
This judgment will become final in the circumstances set out in Article 44 § 2 of the Convention. It may be subject to editorial revision.
In the cas... | 2 |
Administrative Court. In their petition, they repeated their request for legal aid for the court fees.
14. On 17 November 1998 the Diyarbakır Administrative Court dismissed the applicants' request for legal aid. The court held that, since the applicants were represented by a lawyer, they could not be considered to be... | 3 |
main legal problem is the applicants' right of access to a court, the Court concludes that they have filed their application within the six months time-limit as required by Article 35 § 1 of the Convention.
29. In view of the above, the Court rejects the Government's objections.
30. The Court further notes that this... | 3 |
in determining the most appropriate policy for regulating access to domestic courts. Nor can it re-assess the facts which led that court to adopt one decision rather than another. The Court's role is limited to a review under the Convention of the decisions which those authorities have taken in the exercise of their p... | 3 |
incurred before the Court. In respect of their claims, the applicants relied on the Diyarbakır Bar Association's list of recommended minimum fees and submitted a document showing the number of hours – 38 – spent by the lawyer on their case.
50. The Government contested this claim.
51. According to the Court's case-l... | 6 |
FIRST SECTION
CASE OF BIG BROTHER WATCH AND OTHERSv. THE UNITED KINGDOM
(Applications nos. 58170/13, 62322/14 and 24960/15)
JUDGMENT
STRASBOURG
13 September 2018
Referral to the Grand Chamber
04/02/2019
This judgment will become final in the circumstances set ou... | 2 |
Age
(b) The Constitution of the International Telecommunication Union 1992
(c) The 2006 Annual Report of the International Law Commission
2. The Council of Europe
(a) The Council of Europe Convention for the Protection of Individuals with regard to Automatic Processing of Personal Data 1981
(b) The Additional Pro... | 2 |
The nature of the interference
(iii) The applicable test
(iv) Application of the test to material falling into the second category
(v) Application of the test to material falling into the third category
C. The Chapter II regime
1. Admissibility
2. Merits
(a) The parties’ submissions
(i) The applicants
(ii) T... | 2 |
Open Society Justice Initiative, The Law Society of England and Wales and Project Moore; in the second case, to the Center For Democracy & Technology, the Helsinki Foundation For Human Rights, the International Commission of Jurists, the National Union of Journalists and the Media Lawyers’ Association; and in the thir... | 2 |
of the highest intelligence value. Those searches generate an index, and only items on that index may potentially be examined by analysts. All communications which are not on the list must be discarded.
14. The legal framework for bulk interception in force at the relevant time is set out in detail in the “Relevant D... | 1 |
reasons of national security).
23. In their response to the applicants’ claims, the Government adopted a “neither confirm nor deny” approach, that is to say, they declined to confirm or deny whether the applicants’ communications had actually been intercepted. It was therefore agreed that the IPT would determine the ... | 1 |
under a s.8(4) warrant have internal ‘arrangements’ that require a record to be created, explaining why access to the unanalysed intercepted material is required, before an authorised person is able to access such material pursuant to s.16 of RIPA.
4. The internal ‘arrangements’ of those of the Intelligence Services ... | 1 |
noted that arrangements for information sharing were provided for in the statutory framework set out in the Security Services Act 1989 (“the SSA” – see paragraphs 98-99 below) and the Intelligence Services Act 1994 (“the ISA” – see paragraphs 100-103 below). It further referred to a witness statement of Charles Farr, ... | 1 |
of itself not sufficient, because the arrangements must be sufficiently accessible to the public. We are satisfied that they are sufficiently signposted by virtue of the statutory framework to which we have referred and the Statements of the ISC and the Commissioner quoted above, and as now, after the two closed heari... | 1 |
the Weber criteria and was in any event “in accordance with the law”. With regard to the first and second requirements, it considered that the reference to “national security” was sufficiently clear (citing Esbester v. the United Kingdom (dec.), no. 18601/91, 2 April 1993 and Kennedy v. the United Kingdom, no. 26839/0... | 1 |
event that, in the course of examination of the contents, some question of journalistic confidence arose, it observed that there were additional safeguards in the Code of Practice in relation to treatment of such material.
49. Following the publication of the judgment, the parties were invited to make submissions on ... | 1 |
in section 5(3), namely that it is in the interests of national security, for the purpose of preventing or detecting serious crime, or for safeguarding the economic well-being of the United Kingdom; and that the conduct authorised by the warrant is proportionate to what is sought to be achieved by that conduct. In ass... | 1 |
) warrant. Section 8(4) and (5) of RIPA allows the Secretary of State to issue a warrant for “the interception of external communications in the course of their transmission by means of a telecommunication system”.
68. At the time of issuing a section 8(4) warrant, the Secretary of State must also issue a certificate ... | 1 |
it is necessary for the performance of any duty imposed on any person under public records legislation.
76. Section 15(5) requires the arrangements in place to secure compliance with section 15(2) to include such arrangements as the Secretary of State considers necessary for securing that every copy of the material o... | 1 |
authorisation to read, look at or listen to the material has been given by a senior official; and
(c) the selection is made before the end of the permitted period.”
84. Pursuant to section 16(5A), the “permitted period” means:
“(a) in the case of material the examination of which is certified for the purposes of se... | 1 |
means.
3.7. The following elements of proportionality should therefore be considered:
...
Duration of interception warrants
3.18. Interception warrants issued on serious crime grounds are valid for an initial period of three months. Interception warrants issued on national security/economic well-being of the UK grou... | 1 |
for one or more of the authorised purposes set out in section 15(4). It must be securely destroyed when its retention is no longer needed for those purposes. If such information is retained, there must be adequate information management systems in place to ensure that continued retention remains necessary and proporti... | 1 |
to which the warrant relates.
6.7. When conducting interception under a section 8(4) warrant, an intercepting agency must use its knowledge of the way in which international communications are routed, combined with regular surveys of relevant communications links, to identify those individual communications bearers t... | 1 |
issue of warrants in this way to urgent cases where the Secretary of State has personally and expressly authorised the issue of the warrant (section 7(2)(a)), and requires the warrant to contain a statement to that effect (section 7(4)(a)).
6.17. A warrant issued under the urgency procedure lasts for five working day... | 1 |
Secretary of State’s decision is based, and the interception agency may be required to justify the content. Each intercepting agency should keep the following to be made available for scrutiny by the Commissioner as he or she may require:
6.28. Records should also be kept of the arrangements for securing that only ma... | 1 |
s will be set out in the discussions they have with the Government before a Section 12 Notice is served (see paragraph 3.13).
Destruction
7.8. Intercepted material, and all copies, extracts and summaries which can be identified as the product of an interception, must be marked for deletion and securely destroyed as so... | 1 |
and any measures taken to reduce the extent of the collateral intrusion. All records must be retained for the purposes of subsequent examination or audit.
7.17. Access to the material as described in paragraph 7.15 must be limited to a defined period of time, although access may be renewed. If access is renewed, the ... | 1 |
conceded that by virtue of there not being in place a lawful system for dealing with LPP, from January 2010 the regime for the interception/obtaining, analysis, use, disclosure and destruction of legally privileged material had not been in accordance with the law for the purposes of Article 8 § 2 of the Convention and... | 1 |
except so far as necessary.
103. According to section 3 of the ISA, one of the functions of GCHQ is to monitor or interfere with electromagnetic, acoustic and other emissions and any equipment producing such emissions and to obtain and provide information derived from or related to such emissions or equipment and fro... | 1 |
unanalysed intercepted communications from a foreign government
12.5. If a request falling within the second bullet of paragraph 12.2 is approved by the Secretary of State other than in relation to specific selectors, any communications obtained must not be examined by the intercepting agency according to any factors... | 1 |
TRODUCTION
1.1. This code of practice relates to the powers and duties conferred or imposed under Chapter II of Part I of the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 (‘RIPA’). It provides guidance on the procedures to be followed when acquisition of communications data takes place under those provisions. This vers... | 1 |
but not the content, not what was said or written.
2.14. It includes the manner in which, and by what method, a person or machine communicates with another person or machine. It excludes what they say or what data they pass on within a communication including text, audio and video (with the exception of traffic data ... | 1 |
visited pages at http://www.gov.uk/ can be acquired as communications traffic data (if available from the CSP), whereas that a specific webpage that was visited is http://www.gov.uk/government/collections/ripa‑‑forms‑2 may not be acquired as communications data (as it would be content).
2.26. Examples of traffic data... | 1 |
s sources, with unintended impact on freedom of expression. Such an application may still be necessary and proportionate but the risk of unintended consequences should be considered. The special considerations that arise in such cases are discussed further in the section on “Communications data involving certain profes... | 1 |
rare that any conduct to obtain communications data will be proportionate or the collateral intrusion justified.
...
The single point of contact
3.19. The single point of contact (SPoC) is an accredited individual trained to facilitate lawful acquisition of communications data and effective co‑operation between a pub... | 1 |
SPs, it is good practice to engage the SPoC to liaise with the CSP on such requests.
The senior responsible officer
3.31. Within every relevant public authority a senior responsible officer must be responsible for:
Authorisations
3.32. An authorisation provides for persons within a public authority to engage in speci... | 1 |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.