How do you solve a problem like Al Qaeda?

AF marked the second time in as many years that the House of Lords had to consider the permissibility of the government relying upon undisclosed secret evidence to persuade courts to impose control orders upon individuals suspected of "terrorism-related activities".

Charitable interventions and international development

'Our charity campaigns on issues affecting developing countries but we don't currently incorporate the law into our strategies in this area. I've heard of charities using judicial review to challenge government decisions. What does this involve and are there examples of where this has been done on issues relating to international development?'

Bloggers anonymous beware

A police officer who had taken steps to conceal his identity as the anonymous author of a blog about his employment was not entitled to an injunction to restrain a newspaper from revealing his identity where it has been deduced by journalistic detective work. So held Eady J in The Author of a Blog v Times Newspapers [2009] EMLR 22.

Case Notes

Article 3 ECHR does not require the IPCC to conduct an independent investigation into allegations of assault by the police. The State's investigative obligation is met by the availability of criminal proceedings against the officers and the claimant's right to appeal to the IPCC if dissatisfied with the police investigation. Beverley Lang QC and Iain Steele acted for the IPCC. Tom Weisselberg acted for the Home Secretary as Intervener.

The Divisional Court held on 15 October that the Government had failed to produce cogent reasons for rejecting a number of the Ombudsman's findings of maladministration and injustice, and quashed its decision to do so. Dinah Rose QC, Javan Herberg and Jessica Boyd appeared for the EMAG.

This was the first case in which the provisions of The Political Parties, Elections and Referendum Act 2000 on the funding of political parties was considered by the Court of Appeal. In ruling that a sum of GBP 300,000 plus should be forfeited by UKIP as an impermissible donation, the Court established two principles: firstly that under the Act eligibility to donate was linked to eligibility to vote, irrespective of whether the donor was a so-called foreign donor; secondly that forfeiture was the presumptive remedy where impermissible donations were accepted. Michael Beloff QC appeared for the ElectoralCommission.