Legal News

Compensation conundrum—deciphering denied claims under ECHR (McNiece v Criminal Injuries Compensation Authority)

Compensation conundrum—deciphering denied claims under ECHR (McNiece v Criminal Injuries Compensation Authority)
Published on: 07 March 2017
Published by: LexisPSL
  • Compensation conundrum—deciphering denied claims under ECHR (McNiece v Criminal Injuries Compensation Authority)
  • Original news
  • What was the background to this claim?
  • Why is this decision of interest for lawyers?
  • What were the key issues in these joint claims?
  • What did the court decide? Does the decision clarify the law in this area?
  • What are the practical implications of the decision? What should lawyers take note of?
  • Are there any trends emerging in this area? Do you have any predictions for the future?

Article summary

Personal Injury analysis: Under what circumstances can a denied claim under the criminal injuries compensation scheme be challenged through Article 1 of the first protocol to the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR)? Benjamin Tankel of 39 Essex Chambers appeared for the claimant in McNiece, and comments on its implications. or take a trial to read the full analysis.

Popular documents