This website uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience on our website. Learn more

R v Anderson [2002] 4 All ER 1089

By Oxbridge Law TeamUpdated 04/01/2024 07:01

Judgement for the case R v Anderson

Table Of Contents

  • Plaintiff claimed that it was contrary to Article 6 for the Secretary of State to set the minimum mandatory prison sentence.

  • HL agreed, but said that since legislation specifically intended to give the Secretary of State this power, all it could do was issue a s.4 declaration of incompatibility.

  • It said that since the setting of the prison term was as much a part of the trial as sentence, and since the Secretary of State couldn’t be considered an “independent and impartial tribunal” as a member of the exec, this arrangement was contrary to Article 6. 

Any comments or edits about this case? Get in touch

For Further Study on R v Anderson

Criminal Justice, Security, & Human Rights Notes
440 total pages
12 purchased

A collection of the best BCL notes the director of Oxbridge Notes (an O...

Need instant answers? Our AI exam tutor is here to help.

Ask questions 🙋 Get answers 📔 It's simple 👁️👄👁️

Our AI is educated by the highest scoring students across all subjects and schools. Join hundreds of your peers today.

Get Started
Claim every advantage to get a first in law
Administrative Law Notes
1,167 total pages
443 purchased

Administrative Law notes fully updated for recent exams at Oxford and C...