Generate a structured brief — facts, issues, held, reasoning, and significance — for this case in seconds. Or browse the verbatim judgment via the source links below.
Catherine Meredith (instructed by Wilson Solicitors LLP) for the Claimant Kerry Bretherton (instructed by The Government Legal Department) for the Defendant Hearing dates: 1 and 2 December 2015 ____________________
(1) Article 1(b) ( "Purposes of the Convention" ), stating that the purposes of the Trafficking Convention include being "to protect the human rights of the victims of trafficking, design a comprehensive framework for the protection and assistance of victims and witnesses, while guaranteeing gender equality, as well as to ensure effective investigation and prosecution" .
The same can be seen, Miss Meredith suggested, from the fact that Chapter III is entitled "Measures to protect and promote the rights of victims, guaranteeing gender equality" , this being the chapter which contains Article 14.
He then went on at [7] to explain that the Secretary of State's position was that the appropriate approach was the standard Wednesbury approach.
In that case, as the judge observed, Lord Mance, Lord Neuberger and Lord Clarke approved the approach adopted by Lord Bridge in R v Secretary of State for the Home Department, ex p Bugdaycay [1987] AC 514 at page 531 where he concluded that, subject to the weight to be given to a primary decision-maker's findings of fact and exercise of a discretion:
Auto-extracted from BAILII. Full structured brief in progress — the source links below give you the verbatim judgment in the meantime.
Multiple official and mirror sources — pick whichever loads cleanly on your network.
Common Room
0 comments · About the Common Room →
No comments yet — start the discussion.
Voted-best comments help future students and feed Caselaw's AI study tools.