header-logo header-logo

Human rights—Privacy—Family

25 March 2010
Issue: 7410 / Categories: Case law , Law reports
printer mail-detail

AD and another v United Kingdom [2010] ECHR 28680/06, [2010] All ER (D) 153 (Mar)

European Court of Human Rights, Judge Garlicki (President), Judges Bratza, Bonello, Mijovic, Sikuta, Poalelungi and Vucinic, and L Early (Section Registrar), 16 March 2010

The removal of a child from his mother on a mistaken assessment of his injuries has been held to have breached Art 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights, and the lack of a domestic remedy for the mother’s claim a breach of Art 13.

The first applicant, AD, was a UK national. The second applicant, OD, was her son, born in 1996. Following action by the local authority on the mistaken assumption OD had suffered non-accidental injuries, the applicants were separated for a period of time.

The applicants brought proceedings in negligence and personal injury, claiming to have suffered damage due to the separation. The judge held that the authority did not owe a duty of care to a parent in the context of care proceedings based on allegations of abuse. The Court of Appeal upheld

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Freeths—Ruth Clare

Freeths—Ruth Clare

National real estate team bolstered by partner hire in Manchester

Farrer & Co—Claire Gordon

Farrer & Co—Claire Gordon

Partner appointed head of family team

mfg Solicitors—Neil Harrison

mfg Solicitors—Neil Harrison

Firm strengthens agriculture and rural affairs team with partner return

NEWS
Conveyancing lawyers have enjoyed a rapid win after campaigning against UK Finance’s decision to charge for access to the Mortgage Lenders’ Handbook
The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) has launched a recruitment drive for talented early career and more senior barristers and solicitors
Regulators differed in the clarity and consistency of their post-Mazur advice and guidance, according to an interim report by the Legal Services Board (LSB)
The Solicitors Act 1974 may still underpin legal regulation, but its age is increasingly showing. Writing in NLJ this week, Victoria Morrison-Hughes of the Association of Costs Lawyers argues that the Act is ‘out of step with modern consumer law’ and actively deters fairness
A Competition Appeal Tribunal (CAT) ruling has reopened debate on the availability of ‘user damages’ in competition claims. Writing in NLJ this week, Edward Nyman of Hausfeld explains how the CAT allowed Dr Liza Lovdahl Gormsen’s alternative damages case against Meta to proceed, rejecting arguments that such damages are barred in competition law
back-to-top-scroll