Morgan and others v Ministry of Justice (Northern Ireland)
[2023] UKSC 14
In the matter of an application by Rosaleen Dalton for Judicial Review (Northern Ireland)
18 October 2023
[2023] UKSC 36
Supreme Court
A family wanted a new inquest into their father's death in 1988, but the government said it was too long ago. The Supreme Court agreed, saying the law only lets them investigate deaths that happened after a certain date, unless there are very special reasons. They didn't change previous court rulings because doing so would make the law confusing.
Key Facts
- •Rosaleen Dalton challenges the Attorney General for Northern Ireland's (AGNI) decision not to order a further inquest into her father's death in 1988.
- •Mr. Dalton died from an IRA bomb intended for security forces.
- •The AGNI argues the Human Rights Act 1998 doesn't impose a procedural obligation to investigate deaths older than 12 years.
- •The case hinges on the interpretation of the 'genuine connection' test established in European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) case law, specifically regarding the temporal limits for investigating pre-HRA deaths.
- •The Court of Appeal allowed Dalton's appeal, pre-dating the Supreme Court's judgment in McQuillan.
Legal Principles
Article 2 ECHR procedural obligation to investigate deaths potentially engaging state responsibility.
European Convention on Human Rights, Article 2
Human Rights Act 1998 (HRA) implements Article 2 ECHR into UK domestic law, but generally lacks retrospective effect.
Human Rights Act 1998, section 22(4)
'Genuine connection' test: A death pre-dating the HRA may trigger an investigative obligation if there's a genuine connection between the death and the HRA's entry into force. This is primarily determined by temporal proximity (generally not exceeding 10 years) and whether a significant part of the investigation took place or should have after the critical date. Exception: 'Convention values' test for exceptionally serious crimes.
ECtHR case law (Šilih, Janowiec, Mocanu, Mučibabić)
The 'mirror principle': Domestic courts should align HRA application with ECtHR Convention application, but not slavishly.
R (Ullah) v Special Adjudicator [2004] 2 AC 323; Manchester City Council v Pinnock [2011] 2 AC 104
Practice Statement (Judicial Precedent) [1966] 1 WLR 1234: The Supreme Court can depart from previous decisions, but is very circumspect in doing so.
Practice Statement (Judicial Precedent) [1966] 1 WLR 1234
Brecknell principle: A new duty to investigate may arise if new material, after the initial investigation, creates a plausible allegation of state responsibility.
Brecknell v United Kingdom (2007) 46 EHRR 42
Outcomes
Appeal allowed.
Mr. Dalton's death occurred more than 12 years before the HRA came into force; therefore, the AGNI's decision not to order a further inquest is not challengeable under the HRA. The court did not overturn *Finucane* or *McQuillan*, finding it unnecessary to do so to decide the present case, and considering the existing decisions not clearly wrong. Departing from the earlier decisions would harm legal certainty.
Similar Cases
In the matter of an application by James Hugh Allister and others for Judicial Review (Northern Ireland)
[2023] UKSC 5
R (on the application of Maguire) v His Majesty’s Senior Coroner for Blackpool & Fylde and another
[2023] UKSC 20
HM Senior Coroner for the County of the East Riding of Yorkshire and the City of Hull v HM Assistant Coroner for the County of the East Riding of Yorkshire and the City of Hull
[2024] EWHC 2007 (Admin)
Tina Dawn Irving v The Parliamentary and Health Services Ombudsman & Anor
[2023] UKFTT 1087 (GRC)