R v Horncastle
UK courts may decline to follow a Strasbourg decision that does not sufficiently appreciate or accommodate particular aspects of the domestic process.
Facts
Several defendants were convicted of serious offences on the basis of evidence including witness statements from witnesses who were not available to give evidence at trial, because they had died or were too frightened to testify. The hearsay statements were admitted under the Criminal Justice Act 2003. In Al-Khawaja v United Kingdom (2009), the European Court of Human Rights had held that a conviction based solely or decisively on the statement of an absent witness would breach the right to a fair trial under article 6. The defendants appealed on that basis.
Legal principle
The Supreme Court upheld the convictions, declining to follow Al-Khawaja. Lord Phillips said that the requirement to take into account the Strasbourg jurisprudence will normally result in the domestic court applying principles that are clearly established by the Strasbourg Court, but that there will be rare occasions where the domestic court has concerns as to whether a decision of the Strasbourg Court sufficiently appreciates or accommodates particular aspects of our domestic process, and in such circumstances it is open to the domestic court to decline to follow it, giving reasons. The safeguards in the 2003 Act ensured a fair trial. The Grand Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights later modified its approach in Al-Khawaja and Tahery v United Kingdom (2011), taking account of the Supreme Court's reasoning, an example of judicial dialogue.
Related cases on Human Rights Act 1998
- A v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2004] UKHL 56, [2005] 2 AC 68
- Aston Cantlow and Wilmcote with Billesley Parochial Church Council v Wallbank [2003] UKHL 37, [2004] 1 AC 546
- Bellinger v Bellinger [2003] UKHL 21, [2003] 2 AC 467
- Ghaidan v Godin-Mendoza [2004] UKHL 30, [2004] 2 AC 557
- Hirst v United Kingdom (No 2) (2006) 42 EHRR 41
- Manchester City Council v Pinnock [2010] UKSC 45, [2011] 2 AC 104
- R (AB) v Secretary of State for Justice [2021] UKSC 28
- R (Al-Skeini) v Secretary of State for Defence [2007] UKHL 26, [2008] 1 AC 153
Studying public law? Our tutors help you understand and apply cases like this in essays, problem questions and exams. Request a quote or browse our law notes.
This summary is for study and revision and is not legal advice. Although our case summaries are checked for accuracy, we do not guarantee that they are free from errors or omissions. Always read the full judgment for the court's reasoning.
