Damages were not required to provide just satisfaction to a journalist who had had his communication data unlawfully intercepted
News Group Newspapers v Commissioner of Police [2016] UKIPTrib 14_176-H
No compensation awarded to The Sun reporter after police illegally viewed his call records. The declaration of unlawfulness was sufficient remedy.
Communications data necessary in three authorisations
News Group Newspapers Ltd & Ors v Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis [2015] UKIPTrib 14
Challenge to four authorisations under the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000, s 22, which enabled the police to obtain communications data in order to ascertain the sources of information obtained by the claimant journalists.
Intelligence services intercepted civil liberty group communications unlawfully
Liberty & Ors v Government Communications Headquarters & Ors IPT/13/77/H
The IPT has ruled, inter alia, that the intelligence services acted unlawfully in the way they handled intercepted private communications of two civil liberties groups. In the first instance, EIPR’s communications were intercepted, accessed and then unlawfully “retained for materially longer than permitted”. In the second, LRC’s communications were intercepted, then unlawfully selected for examination in contravention of internal procedures that were “not followed in this case”. It was the services’ failure to follow their own procedures that resulted in the unlawful conduct.
No damages for ECHR, art 8 violation by GCHQ, as intercepted legally privileged material had not been used to prejudicial effect
Belhadj & Ors v Secret Sevice & Ors [2015] UKIPTrib 13_132-H
This case concerned whether the claimants’ legally privileged communications have in fact been intercepted/obtained. The Tribunal issued a determination only in favour of the 3rd Claimant, Saadi, after finding 2 documents containing legal professional privilege material held by the agencies, namely by GCHQ. It determined that there was an infringement of art 8 but there should be no award of compensation.
The regime for dealing with private communications of those locating in the UK no longer contravened ECHR, arts 8 and 10
Liberty & Ors v Secretary of State for the Foreign and Commonwealth Office & Ors [2015] UKIPTrib 13_77-H
The court held that prior to the disclosure made and referred to within the judgment, and that of 8 Dec 2014, the regime covering the soliciting, receiving, storing and transmitting by UK authorities of private communications of individuals located in the UK, which have been obtained by US authorities pursuant to Prism and/or Upstream, contravened arts 8 & 10. However, the court held that the regime now complied with arts 8 & 10