The Application of the Human Rights Act 1998 to Public Authorities and Private Bodies

1999 ◽  
Vol 58 (1) ◽  
pp. 159-170 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nicholas Bamforth
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Judicial Review ◽  
Public Authority ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
Public Authorities ◽  
Public And Private ◽  
Human Rights Act ◽  
Human Rights Act 1998 ◽  
Definition Of

THE Human Rights Act 1998 applies only to “public authorities”. This article begins by examining the Act's definition of a “public authority” and how this will interact with existing distinctions between public and private law in domestic judicial review and EU law. It is then argued that the Act may, through two different routes, have a limited horizontal impact between private bodies – although certain technical obstacles will need to be overcome. The article considers, finally, the operation between private bodies of the requirement that legislation be interpreted as far as possible in accordance with the European Convention on Human Rights.

Alternative Remedies

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Duncan Fairgrieve ◽  
Dan Squires QC
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Judicial Review ◽  
Public Authority ◽  
Public Authorities ◽  
Public Office ◽  
Statutory Duty ◽  
Human Rights Act ◽  
Human Rights Act 1998 ◽  
Injured Party ◽  
Alternative Remedies

This book focuses primarily upon claims brought against public authorities for the tort of negligence. Where a public authority causes harm to an individual, either deliberately or carelessly, there may also be other remedies available to the injured party. The present chapter considers some of the more important alternative remedies, though perhaps the most significant alternative now available are claims brought under the Human Rights Act 1998, which are considered separately in Chapter 7. In this chapter we examine the torts of misfeasance in public office and breach of statutory duty as well as judicial review proceedings and complaints to the Ombudsmen.

3. The Human Rights Act 1998 (HRA)

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bernadette Rainey
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Public Authority ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Essential Information ◽  
The Future ◽  
Human Rights Act ◽  
Human Rights Act 1998

Each Concentrate revision guide is packed with essential information, key cases, revision tips, exam Q&As, and more. Concentrates show you what to expect in a law exam, what examiners are looking for, and how to achieve extra marks. This chapter focuses on the Human Rights Act 1998 (HRA), which was introduced to allow individuals to argue cases involving rights contained in the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) directly before a UK court. It first explains the background and rationale underlying the HRA, focusing on the arguments for and against a Human Rights Act, as well as the human rights that are covered and not covered by the HRA. The chapter then discusses the judicial powers/duties and remedies under the HRA, along with powers of derogation and reservation, with an emphasis on ECtHR case law, the interpretation clause, and declarations of incompatibility with the Convention rights. In addition, it examines the HRA’s use of proportionality and judicial deference doctrines when deciding whether an act by a public authority is incompatible with a Convention right. The chapter concludes by assessing the future of the HRA.

8. The sovereignty of Parliament

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Colin Faragher
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
Statutory Interpretation ◽  
Essential Information ◽  
Parliamentary Sovereignty ◽  
Human Rights Act ◽  
Human Rights Act 1998 ◽  
Definition Of

Each Concentrate revision guide is packed with essential information, key cases, revision tips, exam Q&As, and more. Concentrates show you what to expect in a law exam, what examiners are looking for, and how to achieve extra marks. This chapter discusses the definition of parliamentary sovereignty, AV Dicey’s views concerning parliamentary sovereignty, the jurisdiction of the courts, whether the substance of an Act of Parliament can be challenged, the enrolled bill rule; whether the jurisdiction of the court over an Act of Parliament be enlarged; the rule in Pepper v Hart; entrenchment clauses; prospective formula; the effect of the Human Rights Act 1998; the purposive approach to statutory interpretation; and the implications of EU law for parliamentary sovereignty.

5. Human Rights Act 1998

2021 ◽  
pp. 154-198
Author(s):  
Alisdair A. Gillespie ◽  
Siobhan Weare
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Public Authorities ◽  
Human Rights Act ◽  
Human Rights Act 1998

This chapter examines the Human Rights Act 1998 (HRA) and discusses some of the important issues that arise from its use. It also provides an overview of relevant articles in the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR). The HRA 1998 is quite a short Act and its key parts are in a small number of sections. Perhaps the most important is that of s 6 which places an obligation on public authorities to act in a way compatible with the ECHR; s 7 which prescribes how it can be used to obtain a remedy in the courts. This chapter also links to the previous chapters in terms of discussing how the Act is interpreted.

scholarly journals PUBLIC AUTHORITIES AS “VICTIMS” UNDER THE HUMAN RIGHTS ACT

2005 ◽  
Vol 64 (2) ◽  
pp. 315-328
Author(s):  
Howard Davis
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Public Authority ◽  
Current Debate ◽  
Local Authorities ◽  
Public Authorities ◽  
House Of Lords ◽  
Human Rights Act ◽  
Human Rights Act 1998

ONE feature of the current debate concerning the term “public authority” in the Human Rights Act 1998 is a rule to the effect that public authorities are not themselves capable of having and enforcing Convention rights. In what follows this will be referred to as the “rights-restriction rule”. The position was confirmed by the House of Lords in Aston Cantlow and has been given effect by the courts in relation to English local authorities and to NHS Trusts in Scotland. Despite this, doubts have been expressed. In particular the parliamentary Joint Committee has suggested, though without argument, that the denial of Convention rights to public authorities may be wrong in principle and that there are “circumstances in which public authorities have Convention rights”.

19. Remedies

2021 ◽  
pp. 652-679
Author(s):  
Lisa Webley ◽  
Harriet Samuels
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Judicial Review ◽  
Public Authority ◽  
The Public ◽  
Wide Range ◽  
Human Rights Act ◽  
Human Rights Act 1998 ◽  
Complete Series ◽  
Explanatory Text ◽  
Primary Materials

Titles in the Complete series combine extracts from a wide range of primary materials with clear explanatory text to provide readers with a complete introductory resource. This chapter discusses the remedies granted by the court. If a claimant successfully establishes that the public authority has acted in contravention of one of the grounds of review, then the court may grant a remedy. The purpose of a remedy is to tell the public authority what it has to do to comply with the judgment and to ensure, as far as possible, that it obeys the courts’ decision. There are two main types of remedies available in judicial review cases: ordinary remedies (injunction, declaration, and damages) and prerogative remedies (quashing order, prohibiting order, and mandatory order). The chapter also discusses situations that may cause the court to refuse a remedy and the courts’ powers to grant a remedy under the Human Rights Act 1998 (HRA 1998), including a declaration of incompatibility in accordance with section 4 HRA 1998.

15. The Parties to a Judicial Review: Who Can Make a Claim for Judicial Review and Against Whom Can a Claim for Judicial Review be Made?

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lisa Webley ◽  
Harriet Samuels
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Judicial Review ◽  
Public Authorities ◽  
The People ◽  
Or Groups ◽  
Private And Public ◽  
Human Rights Act ◽  
Human Rights Act 1998 ◽  
Complete Series ◽  
Or Organization

Titles in the Complete series combine extracts from a wide range of primary materials with clear explanatory text to provide readers with a complete introductory resource. This chapter discusses the bodies subject to judicial review and who can make claims for judicial review. An action for judicial review can be brought only against a body exercising a public function. If public authorities are carrying out a private function, they are not subject to judicial review unless there is a public law element. Private bodies are, generally, not subject to judicial review unless it can be shown that they are carrying out a public function, such as administering a statutory scheme. If the judicial review concerns human rights, then the claim must be brought against a public authority. The Human Rights Act 1998 creates two kinds of public authorities: core public authorities and functional public authorities. Core public authorities are public authorities, such as government departments and the police force. Functional public authorities have private and public functions, but only their public functions are subject to the Act. The rules of standing in judicial review cases determine whether individuals or groups are permitted to challenge a decision of a public body. An individual or organization may bring a claim for judicial review only with the permission of the courts, which means that standing restricts the people and organizations that may bring a judicial review claim.

5. Human Rights Act 1998

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alisdair Gillespie ◽  
Siobhan Weare
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Public Authorities ◽  
Human Rights Act ◽  
Human Rights Act 1998

This chapter examines the Human Rights Act 1998 (HRA) and discusses some of the important issues that arise from its use. It also provides an overview of relevant articles in the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR). The HRA 1998 is quite a short Act and its key parts are in a small number of sections. Perhaps the most important is that of s 6 which places an obligation on public authorities to act in a way compatible with the ECHR, and s 7 which prescribes how it can be used to obtain a remedy in the courts. This chapter also links to the previous chapters in terms of discussing how the Act is interpreted.

Parochial Church Council of the Parish of Aston Cantlow, Wilmcote with Billesley v Wallbank [2003] UKHL 37, House of Lords

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Thomas E. Webb
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Public Law ◽  
Case Note ◽  
Public Authorities ◽  
Parish Church ◽  
House Of Lords ◽  
Local Parish ◽  
Human Rights Act ◽  
Human Rights Act 1998 ◽  
Definition Of

Essential Cases: Public Law provides a bridge between course textbooks and key case judgments. This case document summarizes the facts and decision in Parochial Church Council of the Parish of Aston Cantlow, Wilmcote with Billesley v Wallbank [2003] UKHL 37, House of Lords. The underlying substantive issue in this case was the question of whether the Wallbanks were liable to pay for the repair of their local parish church. However, this case note focuses on the definition of public authorities under s. 6 of the Human Rights Act 1998 (HRA). Public authorities are required to act in accordance with the HRA, and the Wallbanks contended that the Parochial Church Council was a public authority within the meaning of s. 6. The document also includes supporting commentary from author Thomas Webb.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document