David has recently received a pivotal judgment from the Grand Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights in Nealon and Hallam v The United Kingdom
David Pojur represented one of two appellants who spent nearly 25 years in prison before their convictions were overturned by the Court of Appeal. The landmark case challenged the overly restrictive legal test for compensation introduced in 2014, which casts doubt on the innocence of acquitted individuals.
Despite quashed convictions, the Justice Secretary can deny compensation if innocence isn’t proven ‘beyond reasonable doubt,’ resulting in a mere 7% success rate for compensation applications over the past eight years.
The Grand Chamber’s 17 judges in Strasbourg assessed whether the men were entitled to compensation from the UK Government following release from custody. Although the Grand Chamber did not challenge the UK’s restrictive compensation scheme, five judges dissented, criticising the UK’s ‘highly undesirable attitude towards the presumption of innocence.’
The Grand Chamber was “not insensible to the potentially devastating impact of a wrongful conviction” but noted that its role was not to determine how the UK should alter its laws to reflect “the moral obligation they may owe to persons who have been wrongfully convicted”. The Court noted the “virtually insurmountable” test for compensation in the UK and the need for a re-evaluation.
This judgment reaffirms that the 2014 test for compensation (Section 133(1ZA) of the Criminal Justice Act 1988) aligns with Article 6 (2) of the European Convention of Human Rights.
#HumanRights #Justice #MiscarriageOfJustice #LegalReform #DavidPojur #EuropeanCourtOfHumanRights #GrandChamber #Compensation #Innocence #LegalAdvocacy #Strasbourg
David Pojur specialises in Human Rights Article 2 Inquests and Public Inquiries. He is recommended by Chambers and Partners and the Legal 500 and is clerked by Ty Price.
