Brogan and Others v. The United Kingdom
European Court of Human Rights
(Application no. 11209/84; 11234/84; 11266/84; 11386/85), Judgement 29 November 1988, [1989] ECHR 9 (30 May 1989)
- Written by Whitney Punzone, JD
Facts
Terence Patrick Brogan, Dermot Coyle, William McFadden, and Michael Tracey (collectively, the applicants) (plaintiffs) were all arrested under § 12 of the 1984 Prevention of Terrorism Act (the act) and held in detention for periods of five days, six days, four days, and four and a half days, respectively. The applicants were visited by their legal representatives, but none of them were brought before a judge nor charged after they were released. The applicants sued the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland (the government) (defendant), alleging that the government had violated Article 5, paragraph 3 of the act by the officers arresting and detaining the applicants for extended periods of time. The government argued the difficulties in obtaining sufficient evidence to bring charges against the applicants, and that the secretary of state was in a better position to deal with these issues than a court. The European Commission referred the matter to the European Court of Human Rights.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Per curiam)
What to do next…
Here's why 815,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.