-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 0
/
Copy pathcaptions-en2_1.vtt
115 lines (77 loc) · 3.08 KB
/
captions-en2_1.vtt
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
WEBVTT
kind: captions
lang: en
000:00:00.000 --> 0:00:03.000 position:10%,start align:start size:35%
[UKSC logo on black background]
000:00:05.100 --> 0:00:16.800
[Introductory titles and count-down clock.]
000:00:17.100 --> 0:00:34.800
[Change of scene: Courtroom, those present stand as Justices enter the room.]
000:00:35.100 --> 0:00:40.800
[As Justices take their seats all others take theirs. Usher makes indistinct statement of case details.]
00:00:41.700 --> 00:00:43.000 position:10%,start align:start size:35%
<v Lord Phillips of Worth Matravers, KG> Yes, Mr Moore.
00:00:43.800 --> 00:00:48.000 position:10%,start align:start size:35%
<v Mr Moore, lawyer> My Lords, I appear on behalf of uh, the appellant
00:00:48.034 --> 00:00:49.800
I'll refer to simply as 'A'.
00:00:50.000 --> 00:00:51.800
Along with Mr Vasal Adams
00:00:52.200 --> 00:00:54.200
My learned friends: Mr Jonathan Crow...
00:00:55.200 --> 00:00:56.300
Mr Jason Copel
00:00:56.500 --> 00:00:59.200
appear for the respondent,
00:00:59.300 --> 00:01:01.300
and my learned friends: Lord Panic and Mr Higgin
00:01:01.500 --> 00:01:03.800
uh, appear on behalf of justice
00:01:03.900 --> 00:01:06.300
as an intervener in this appeal.
000:01:08.200 --> 00:01:11.400
<v Mr Moore, lawyer> Lords, this is an appeal against a decision of the court of appeal
00:01:11.600 --> 00:01:13.600
of the 18th of February of this year,
00:01:14.300 --> 00:01:17.000
that the Administrative Court has no jurisdiction
00:01:18.300 --> 00:01:21.800
to hear proceedings brought by 'A' against the respondent
00:01:22.300 --> 00:01:26.600
pursuant to Section 7-1A of the Human Rights Act.
00:01:27.800 --> 00:01:30.600
A is a former member of the security service
00:01:31.000 --> 00:01:35.600
and R is the director of establishments of security service.
00:01:36.500 --> 00:01:41.100
A has brought judicial review proceedings challenging
00:01:41.200 --> 00:01:45.300
R's respondent's refusal to authorise publication of a book
00:01:45.500 --> 00:01:48.300
he's written about his time in the service
00:01:48.500 --> 00:01:51.600
which he strongly believes should be published in the public interest.
00:01:52.500 --> 00:01:56.200
Without the authority from the respondents
00:01:56.500 --> 00:02:02.500
A's obligation of confidentiality bites, and he cannot publish.
00:02:03.500 --> 00:02:06.500
Lords, the jurisdiction issue arises because...
00:02:06.600 --> 00:02:10.200
in addition to challenging on traditional public law grounds
00:02:10.500 --> 00:02:12.500
of irrationality and bias
00:02:13.600 --> 00:02:17.500
A raised the claim that, the respondent's refusal of permission
00:02:17.500 --> 00:02:21.500
was unlawful in the sense identified in Section 6.1
00:02:21.500 --> 00:02:24.200
of the Human Rights Act 1998
00:02:24.500 --> 00:02:30.800
i.e. that the respondent as a public authority in refusing authority
00:02:31.000 --> 00:02:34.800
to publish, had acted in a way incompatible
00:02:34.800 --> 00:02:39.400
with A's conventional right to freedom of expression
00:02:39.600 --> 00:02:43.500
under Article 10 of the European Convention.