Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

Curley v. the United Kingdom

Curley v. the United Kingdom 139 11 hrcd [ 2000 ] CURLEY v. THE UNITED KINGDOM Prohibition of torture – no violation Article 3 Right to liberty and security – violation Article 5, Sections 4 and 5 Failure of prisoner detained “during Her Majesty’s pleasure” to receive a review of the lawfulness of continued detention by a court offering the necessary judicial guarantees, in particular, the power to order release and adversarial proceedings, was a violation. That this violation could not give rise to an enforceable claim for compensation before the domestic courts was also a violation. No indication that the lack of any review was sufficiently severe in its effects to constitute degrading and inhuman punishment. In a judgment delivered on 28 March 2000 in the case of Curley v. the United Kingdom , the European Court of Human Rights held unanimously that there had been a violation of Article 5 , Section 4 (right to access to a review of continuing detention) and Article 5 , Section 5 (right to obtain compensation) of the European Convention on Human Rights, but that the length of detention did not constitute degrading and inhuman punishment under Article 3 of the Convention. Under Article 41 http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Human Rights Case Digest Brill

Curley v. the United Kingdom

Human Rights Case Digest , Volume 11 (3-4): 139 – Jan 1, 2000
Download PDF
4 pages

Loading next page...
 
/lp/brill/curley-v-the-united-kingdom-CuXzKSlHba

References

References for this paper are not available at this time. We will be adding them shortly, thank you for your patience.

Publisher
Brill
Copyright
© 2000 Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, The Netherlands
ISSN
0965-934X
eISSN
1571-8131
DOI
10.1163/15718130020617495
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

139 11 hrcd [ 2000 ] CURLEY v. THE UNITED KINGDOM Prohibition of torture – no violation Article 3 Right to liberty and security – violation Article 5, Sections 4 and 5 Failure of prisoner detained “during Her Majesty’s pleasure” to receive a review of the lawfulness of continued detention by a court offering the necessary judicial guarantees, in particular, the power to order release and adversarial proceedings, was a violation. That this violation could not give rise to an enforceable claim for compensation before the domestic courts was also a violation. No indication that the lack of any review was sufficiently severe in its effects to constitute degrading and inhuman punishment. In a judgment delivered on 28 March 2000 in the case of Curley v. the United Kingdom , the European Court of Human Rights held unanimously that there had been a violation of Article 5 , Section 4 (right to access to a review of continuing detention) and Article 5 , Section 5 (right to obtain compensation) of the European Convention on Human Rights, but that the length of detention did not constitute degrading and inhuman punishment under Article 3 of the Convention. Under Article 41

Journal

Human Rights Case Digest – Brill

Published: Jan 1, 2000

There are no references for this article.