|Source:||All England Reporter|
|Publisher Citation:|| All ER (D) 108 (Jun)|
|Neutral Citation:|| UKSC 24|
Lord Phillips P, Lord Saville, Lord Rodger, Lord Walker, Lord Brown, Lord Clarke and Sir John Dyson SCJJ
|Representation||Edward Fitzgerald QC and Kate Markus (instructed by Wilson Solicitors LLP) for AP.|
|Robin Tam QC, Tim Eicke and Rory Dunlop (instructed by the Treasury Solicitor) for the Secretary of State.|
|Judgment Dates:||16 June 2010|
Human rights - Right to liberty and security - Prevention of terrorism - Control order - Non-derogating control order - Secretary of State making non-derogating control order against person suspected of involvement in terrorism - Secretary of State modifying order to require controlled person to reside outside of London - Judge finding modified control order not breaching controlled person's right to family life but breaching right to liberty on basis of combined effect of 16-hour curfew and social isolation including separation from family - Court of Appeal ruling judge erred in treating effect of relocation on family visits as decisive factor - Whether conditions which were proportionate restrictions on art 8 rights could be decisive factor in relation to art 5 - Whether subjective and/or person-specific factor could be taken into account when considering whether control order amounted to deprivation of liberty - Whether permissible for appeal court to interfere with judge's findings of fact on basis findings on art 8 ground inconsistent with those on art 5 - Human Rights Act 1998, Sch 1, Pt I, art 5(1).