Please enable JavaScript.

Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.

Article 5 - Coggle Diagram

- - - - first limb: arrest and detention on reasonable suspicion of having committed an offence
        
        Fox, Campbell and Hartley v UK- Under terrorist legislation in Northern Ireland 1970s, there only needed to be suspicion, not reasonable suspicion. Three were arrested on suspicion of being a terrorist. EctHR held that even in emergency situation, 5(1)© requires reasonable suspicion, meaning there must be evidence of facts or information that would satisfy an objective observer. It was not enough that they has previous convictions. Violation to article 5
      - second limb: permits arrest and detention when it is reasonably considered necessary to prevent his committing an offence or fleeing after having done so
        
        Ostendorf v Germany shows the test for reasonableness is the same as that in Fox, Cambell and Hartley. In the case they also stated under the second limb, it must be for the purpose of bringing him before a competent legal authority. It did not permit detention of a football hooligan for duration of the football match to prevent violence
        
        Ostendorf was a ECtHR case, in Supreme Court case R (Hicks) v Commissioner Police for the Metropolis- they disagreed and followed minority in ECtHR. They were detained to prevent breach of the peace and disrupting a royal wedding. Said the second limb allowed for this as preventative measure
        
        Issue resolved in Grand Chamber of ECtHR- S, V, A v Denmark- in favour of Supreme Court decision in Hicks, to prevent a concrete and specific offence
- - - - where automatic periodic review is required by national law, those decisions must follow at regular intervals. Whilst the maximum period between reviews was to be determined in the light of individual circumstances, intervals of more than one year are generally not treated as being reasonable