![]() |
[Home] [Databases] [World Law] [Multidatabase Search] [Help] [Feedback] [DONATE] | |||||||||
England and Wales Court of Appeal (Civil Division) Decisions |
||||||||||
PLEASE SUPPORT BAILII & FREE ACCESS TO LAW
To maintain its current level of service, BAILII urgently needs the support of its users.
Since you use the site, please consider making a donation to celebrate BAILII's 25 years of providing free access to law. No contribution is too small. If every visitor this month gives just £5, it will have a significant impact on BAILII's ability to continue providing this vital service.
Thank you for your support! | ||||||||||
You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> England and Wales Court of Appeal (Civil Division) Decisions >> Hadiova v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2003] EWCA Civ 701 (09 May 2003) URL: https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2003/701.html Cite as: [2003] EWCA Civ 701 |
[New search]
[Context]
[View without highlighting]
[Printable RTF version]
[Help]
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL (CIVIL DIVISION)
ON APPEAL FROM AN IMMIGRATION APPEAL TRIBUNAL
(His Honour Judge P M Lakin)
Strand London, WC2 |
||
B e f o r e :
LORD JUSTICE TUCKEY
LORD JUSTICE KEENE
____________________
ALENA HADIOVA | Claimant/Appellant | |
-v- | ||
SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE HOME DEPARTMENT | Defendant/Respondent |
____________________
Smith Bernal Wordwave Limited
190 Fleet Street, London EC4A 2AG
Tel No: 020 7404 1400 Fax No: 020 7831 8838
(Official Shorthand Writers to the Court)
MR ANGUS MCCULLOUGH (instructed by Treasury Solicitors) appeared on behalf of the Respondent
____________________
(AS APPROVED BY THE COURT)
Crown Copyright ©
Friday, 9th May 2003
"in accordance with the law and is necessary in a democratic society in the interests of national security, public safety or the economic well-being of the country, for the prevention of disorder or crime, for the protection of health or morals or for the protection of the rights and freedoms of others".
In many cases, an issue would arise as to whether the interference can be justified under Article 8(2).
"By reason of their direct and continuous contact with the vital forces of their countries, state authorities are in principle in a better position than the international judge to give an opinion on the exact content of these requirements as well as on the 'necessity' of a restriction or a penalty intended to meet them."
Order: Appeal dismissed. Detailed assessment of the appellants costs.