Actions
Cases Citing This Decision
3
-
Dotcom v Deputy Solicitor-General
[2015] NZHC 1197
Citation 1
…41 United States v Montgomery (No 2) [2004] UKHL 37, [2004] 1 WLR 2241. 42 I have noted the express statutory discretion conferred on the Court in the UK legislation at [97] above.…
-
Em (Lebanon) (FC) (Appellant) v Secretary of State for the Home Department (Respondent)
[2008] UKHL 64
Citation 2
…es a complete denial of his rights“ (emphasis added). I returned to the topic in Government of the United States of America v Montgomery (No 2) [2004] UKHL 37, [2004] 1 WLR 2241. In para 26 of my opinion, with which the other members of the House agreed, I stated:…
-
EM (Lebanon)v Secretary of State For The Home Department
[2008] UKHL 64
Citation 3
…a complete denial of his rights" (emphasis added). I returned to the topic in Government of the United States of America v Montgomery (No 2) [2004] UKHL 37, [2004] 1 WLR 2241. In para 26 of my opinion, with which the other members of the House agreed, I stated: "In the Ullah case and the Razgar case the House ac…
Statutory Material Cited
0
-
Government of The United States of America v. Montgomery and Another
[2001] UKHL 3
Citation 1
…set out in paragraphs 4 to 11 of the opinion of my noble and learned friend Lord Hoffmann in Government of the United States of America v Montgomery [2001] UKHL 3; [2001] 1 WLR 196, to which I would refer. After lengthy and complex litigation the US district court made an order on 18 August 1995, whereby it hel…
-
Razgar, R (on the Application of) v. Sectretary of State for the Home Department
[2004] UKHL 27
Citation 2
…s of the House in R (Ullah) v Special Adjudicator [2004] UKHL 26; [2004] 3 WLR 23 and R (Razgar) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2004] UKHL 27; [2004] 3 WLR 58 and it is unnecessary to set them out in detail again in this judgment. It is sufficient to refer only to two of these cases. In Einhorn v F…
-
Ullah, R (on the Application of) v Special Adjudicator
[2004] UKHL 26
Citation 3
…would observe that in my judgment the case belongs to the category classified by Lord Bingham of Cornhill in R (Ullah) v Special Adjudicator [2004] UKHL 26; [2004] 3 WLR 23 as "foreign cases" rather than "domestic cases". In the latter category, exemplified by Abdulaziz, Cabales and Balkandi v United Kingdom (19…