Matrix’s Legal Support Service produce summaries of cases that involve Matrix members.
Bucnys v Ministry of Justice, & other cases  UKSC 71
Extraditees submitted, inta alia, that a Ministry of Justice could not be a “judicial authority” within the meaning of the Council Framework Decision 2002/584/JHA and/or the Extradition Act 2003, Pt 1. Held: an EAW issued by a ministry could be regarded as issued by a judicial authority issued at the warrant at the request of and by way of endorsement of a decision made by a court etc responsible for the sentence.
London Christian Radio Ltd & Anor v Radio Advertising Clearance Centre & Anor  EWCA Civ 1495
An advertisement was “directed towards a political end” under the Communications Act 2003, s 319(2)(b). Regard should be had to the effect the advertisement had on political debate and not the intentions of the advertiser. The statute was not ambiguous and political was a wide concept that included both political companies and social advocacy bodies. There had been no breach of ECHR, art 10.
McCririck v Channel 4 Television Corporation & Anor (2013)
The claimant was dismissed because of his persona, and not because of his age. The respondent demonstrated a proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim and therefore the claim failed. As Channel 4 did not contravene the Equality Act 2010, the second respondent IMG could not have helped them to do so. However, even if Channel 4 had acted unlawfully, IMG’s actions did not amount to “helping” for the purposes of the Equality Act 2010, s 112.
X & Ors v Z & Ors (C-199/12 to C-201/12)
Directive 2004/83/EC supports the finding that homosexuals targeted by criminal laws must be regarded as forming a particular social group. A term of imprisonment that sanctions homosexual acts must be regarded as being a disproportionate or discriminatory punishment, and thus an act of persecution. It was unnecessary to distinguish acts that interfered with the core areas of the expression of sexual orientation from acts which do not affect those areas.
CF & Ors v The Security Service & Ors  EWHC 3402 (QB)
Whether a closed material application could be made. Held: The Court could make a declaration before disclosure had been given and without completing a public interest immunity exercise. Following the Justice and Security Act 2013, s 6(1) a closed material application could be made to the court