Of Cordons, Riots and Deprivations of Liberty: A Case Note on Austin v Commissioner of Police for the Metropolis

This paper analyses the recent decision in Austin v Commissioner of Police for the Metropolis, arising out of the policing of the May Day disturbance in 2001. The House of Lords decided that detaining a group of several thousand protesters in a cordon for seven hours was not a deprivation of liberty within Article 5 of the ECHR. This case note subjects the reasoning of the House to criticism. It concludes that the Strasbourg and UK cases relied on do not sustain the conclusion that it reaches: first that proportionality and balance properly play a role within Article 5 and secondly, as result, that the motive of the police is important in deciding whether or not a deprivation of liberty has taken place. The case is therefore of crucial importance in the ongoing development of both Article 5 jurisprudence domestically and at Strasbourg and of peaceful protest law in the UK. It is also of obvious topical resonance in light of the policing of the G20 summit in London in April this year.