Spotlight
Family Law Awards 2020
Shortlist announced - time to place your vote!
Court of Protection Practice 2020
'Court of Protection Practice goes from strength to strength, having...
Jackson's Matrimonial Finance Tenth Edition
Jackson's Matrimonial Finance is an authoritative specialist text...
Spotlight
Latest articles
Practical aspects to assessing competence in children
Rebecca Stevens, Partner, Royds Withy KingThis is an article regarding the practical aspects to assessing competence in children. The article explores a range of practicalities, such as meeting a...
Scrumping the crop of recent pension decisions
Rhys Taylor, 36 Family and 30 Park PlaceJonathan Galbraith, Mathieson Consulting2020 has thus far proved to be a memorable year for all the wrong reasons, but nonetheless it remains an interesting one...
Conduct in financial remedies – when is it now a relevant consideration?
Rachel Gillman, 1 GC/Family LawThis article provides an overview of all aspects of financial misconduct following the recent decision of Mostyn J in OG v AG [2020] EWFC 52, wherein all aspects of...
The treatment of RSUs/Stock Options in light of XW v XH
Peter Mitchell QC, 29 Bedford RowStock Options and Restricted Stock Units (RSUs) are frequently encountered by the Family Court when dividing property on divorce or dissolution of a Civil Partnership....
Hundreds of thousands of companies worldwide fall victims to hackers every year. Is your firm one of them?
SPONSORED CONTENT Image source: Information is beautifulYou and other lawyers and legal assistants in your firm likely have accounts on the hacked websites listed in the image above. If a hacker...
View all articles
Authors

CRIMINAL LAW/HUMAN RIGHTS: Attorney General v Benyoucef [2008] JRC 157

Sep 29, 2018, 17:37 PM
Slug : attorney-general-v-benyoucef-2008-jrc-157
Meta Title :
Meta Keywords :
Canonical URL :
Trending Article : No
Prioritise In Trending Articles : No
Date : Sep 19, 2008, 06:23 AM
Article ID : 88781

(Royal Court (Samedi Division); M.C.St.J.Birt , Deputy Bailiff; 19 September 2008)

The father had been convicted of sexual offences and sentenced to 12 years imprisonment. The eldest two of his five children, aged 12 and 11, applied for leave to intervene in that part of the sentencing hearing concerning an application for a recommendation that the father be deported from Jersey at the end of the sentence.

The rights of the children under European Convention on Human Rights, Art 8, would be greatly affected by a decision of a court to make a recommendation. The ability of the children to intervene and to seek to persuade the court not to make a recommendation was a procedural protection of real benefit, which might have an indirect effect. Given the effect of a recommendation on a child's family life, refusing a child permission even to address the court would not be fulfilling the requirements of the procedural guarantees offered by Art 8. The children's guardian was given leave to intervene, and to be heard orally on the matter of deportation.

Categories :
  • Archive
  • Judgments
Tags :
Authors
Provider :
Product Bucket :
Recommend These Products
Related Articles
Load more comments
Comment by from