Fox, Campbell and Hartley v UK (1990) 13 EHRR 157 is the key case on the 'reasonable suspicion' requirement within the ECHR, art 5(1)(c). Under terrorist legislation made in relation to Northern Ireland in the late 1970s, a lawful arrest merely required 'suspicion' of an offence on the part of the police rather than 'reasonable suspicion'. The ECtHR held that, even under an emergency situation, the ECHR, art 5(1)(c) required there to be reasonable suspicion, meaning that there had to be evidence of 'facts or information which would satisfy an objective observer that the person concerned may have committed the offence'. Under the particular circumstances in this case, therefore, [outcome].
Answer
the arrests had been carried out contrary to the ECHR, art 5(1)
Tags
#freedom-of-person #human-rights #public
Question
Fox, Campbell and Hartley v UK (1990) 13 EHRR 157 is the key case on the 'reasonable suspicion' requirement within the ECHR, art 5(1)(c). Under terrorist legislation made in relation to Northern Ireland in the late 1970s, a lawful arrest merely required 'suspicion' of an offence on the part of the police rather than 'reasonable suspicion'. The ECtHR held that, even under an emergency situation, the ECHR, art 5(1)(c) required there to be reasonable suspicion, meaning that there had to be evidence of 'facts or information which would satisfy an objective observer that the person concerned may have committed the offence'. Under the particular circumstances in this case, therefore, [outcome].
Answer
?
Tags
#freedom-of-person #human-rights #public
Question
Fox, Campbell and Hartley v UK (1990) 13 EHRR 157 is the key case on the 'reasonable suspicion' requirement within the ECHR, art 5(1)(c). Under terrorist legislation made in relation to Northern Ireland in the late 1970s, a lawful arrest merely required 'suspicion' of an offence on the part of the police rather than 'reasonable suspicion'. The ECtHR held that, even under an emergency situation, the ECHR, art 5(1)(c) required there to be reasonable suspicion, meaning that there had to be evidence of 'facts or information which would satisfy an objective observer that the person concerned may have committed the offence'. Under the particular circumstances in this case, therefore, [outcome].
Answer
the arrests had been carried out contrary to the ECHR, art 5(1)
If you want to change selection, open original toplevel document below and click on "Move attachment"
Parent (intermediate) annotation
Open it sonable suspicion, meaning that there had to be evidence of 'facts or information which would satisfy an objective observer that the person concerned may have committed the offence'. Under the particular circumstances in this case, therefore, <span>the arrests had been carried out contrary to the ECHR, art 5(1).<span><body><html>
Original toplevel document (pdf)
cannot see any pdfs
Summary
status
not learned
measured difficulty
37% [default]
last interval [days]
repetition number in this series
0
memorised on
scheduled repetition
scheduled repetition interval
last repetition or drill
Details
No repetitions
Discussion
Do you want to join discussion? Click here to log in or create user.