Results tagged “Lord Justice Stanley Burnton”

The British and Irish Legal Institute website has the text of Lord Justice Stanley Burnton and Mr. Justice Wilkie's refusal to allow Gary McKinnon's case to be certified to go up to the Supreme Court on appeal.

McKinnon, R (on the application of) v Secretary of State for Home Affairs [2009] EWHC 2449 (Admin) (09 October 2009)
Cite as: [2009] EWHC 2449 (Admin)


Lord Justice Stanley Burnton :


1. Following the handing down of judgment in this case and on the Claimant's application for permission to apply for judicial review against the Director of Public Prosecutions, we gave directions for the parties to file and to serve written submissions on the Claimant's application for certification of points of law of general public importance and for leave to appeal. In addition, the Claimant sought an oral hearing in the event that the Court was minded to refuse his applications.


Article 8



We therefore refuse permission to apply for judicial review on the Article 8 ground and, it follows, there cannot be a certificate on a point of law on Article 8. In these circumstances, no question of leave to appeal on this ground arises.

Article 3


5. For the same reason, i.e. that the extradition of the Claimant will not, on the evidence before us, involve or result in treatment that will breach his rights under Article 3, we do not consider that his case raises the points of general public importance suggested by the Claimant in paragraph 1.5 of his submission dated 22 August 2009.


6. In these circumstances, we refuse permission to apply for judicial review against the Secretary of State on the ground of alleged breach of the Claimant's rights under Article 8, and we decline to certify any point of law of general public importance. It follows that we refuse permission to appeal.

Another legal hearing, soley on points of law, on which the learned Judges have virtually no scope for interpreting things in Gary's favour, due to the catch all wording and the political unwillingness of the Labour Home Secretaries to stand up for British justice when they had the opportunity to do so during the bureaucratic Extradition Act 2003 Part 2 Extradition to Category 2 territories legal process.

Note that there were only opportunities to make written legal submissions on "points of law" in this hearing, and no actual forensic evidence or witnesses or the facts of the case against Gary were examined by the Judges or the prosecution or defence lawyers.

What now ? Another attempt to appeal to the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg ? On what grounds ?

The European Court of Human Rights refused to hear the previous attempt to appeal under Article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights (prohibition of inhuman or degrading treatment), back in August 2009.

See the Human Rights Act 2000 Schedule 1 The Articles:


Article 3 Prohibition of torture

No one shall be subjected to torture or to inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.


Article 8 Right to respect for private and family life

1 Everyone has the right to respect for his private and family life, his home and his correspondence.

2 There shall be no interference by a public authority with the exercise of this right except such as is in accordance with the law and is necessary in a democratic society in the interests of national security, public safety or the economic well-being of the country, for the prevention of disorder or crime, for the protection of health or morals, or for the protection of the rights and freedoms of others.


Gary McKinnon's solicitors, Kaim Todner LLP, say that:

The judgments in the two judicial reviews, one against the Secretary of State and the second against the DPP, will be handed down on Friday 31st July

Another stressful time for Gary's family, friends and supporters.

UPDATE: The official UK Courts Service Daily Cause list at the Royal Courts of Justice, in the Strand, London:




Friday 31 July, 2009
At 10 o'clock

CO/9914/2008 The Queen on the application of Mckinnon v SS For Home Department

CO/4801/2009 The Queen on the application of Mckinnon v DPP

SS = Secretary of State
DPP = Director of Public Prosecutions

It will probably only take 10 or 15 minutes for the two Judgments to be "handed down"

Whilst awaiting the "reserved" decision of the Judicial Review of the Home Office's decision to deliberately ignore the Asperger's Syndrome aspects of the Gary McKinnon extradition case his legal team have applied for another Judicial Review.

This challenges the decision by the Crown Prosecution Service and the Director of Public Prosecutions, not to prosecute Gary under the Computer Misuse Act 1990 here in the UK.

This would give him a chance of a fairer trial than in the USA, and, if found guilty, a more proportionate prison sentence, to be served in the UK. Prosecution for the same alleged offences in the UK, would take precedence over any extradition to the USA, as is usual under international extradition law.

The Oral Application will be heard on Tuesday 14th July 2009, at 2pm, by the same Judges who heard the Judicial Review on June 9th i.e. Lord Justice Stanley Burnton (a Lord Justice of Appeal) and Mr Justice Wilkie.

If they decide to hear this Judicial Review, they will do so that afternoon.

It would be extraordinary if these two eminent Judges were to publish their "reserved decision" on the first Judicial Review, before the 14th July