Donald James Nicholls, Baron Nicholls of Birkenhead, PC (born 25 January 1933), is a British lawyer and retired Law Lord (Lord of Appeal in Ordinary).
Contents |
Nicholls was educated at Birkenhead School, before reading Law at Liverpool University and Trinity Hall, Cambridge. He was called to the Bar in 1958 as a member of the Middle Temple, taking silk as a Queen's Counsel in 1974. He was made a High Court Judge in 1983, the same year in which he was knighted, before rising to the rank of Lord Justice of Appeal, a position in which he served until 1991. He became Vice-Chancellor of the Supreme Court of England and Wales (now the Senior Courts) between 1991–94, before his appointment to a Lord of Appeal in Ordinary and elevation to a life peer as Baron Nicholls of Birkenhead, of Stoke d'Abernon in the County of Surrey.
In 1998, Lord Nicholls of Birkenhead and the other British Law Lords came to the international fore in deciding whether Sen. Augusto Pinochet could be extradited to Spain. Three lords, including Nicholls, rejected the argument that Pinochet was immune from arrest and prosecution for his acts as Head of State in Chile. They said the State Immunity Act 1978 flouted a battery of international legislation on human rights abuses to which Britain is a signatory and, secondly, it would have meant endorsing the arguments of Pinochet's legal team that British law would have protected even Adolf Hitler.
Lord Nicholls of Birkenhead said:
| “ | International law has made plain that certain types of conduct, including torture and hostage-taking, are not acceptable conduct on the part of anyone. This applies as much to heads of state, or even more so, as it does to everyone else. The contrary conclusion would make a mockery of international law." | ” |
He retired as a Law Lord on 10 January 2007.[1]
Lord Nicholls has played a key role in media law cases: he gave the leading judgment in the case of Reynolds v Times where he laid out a list of eight non-exhaustive factors which should be considered, if the qualified privilege defence is to apply. Although there is no privacy law per se under English law in the case of Campbell v MGN, he set out the elements for an action of 'misuse of private information'. Although he dissented along with Lord Hoffman in the case believing the information that was published was in the editors margin of appreciation.
| Legal offices | ||
|---|---|---|
| Preceded by Sir Nicolas Browne-Wilkinson |
Vice-Chancellor 1991 - 1994 |
Succeeded by Sir Richard Scott |