scholarly journals ABORTION IN NORTHERN IRELAND AND THE EUROPEAN CONVENTION ON HUMAN RIGHTS: REFLECTIONS FROM THE UK SUPREME COURT

2019 ◽  
Vol 68 (2) ◽  
pp. 477-494
Author(s):  
Bríd Ní Ghráinne ◽  
Aisling McMahon
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
United Kingdom ◽  
Northern Ireland ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
International Law ◽  
European Convention ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Uk Supreme Court ◽  
The Uk

AbstractOn 7 June 2018, the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom (UKSCt) issued its decision on, inter alia, whether Northern Ireland's near-total abortion ban was compatible with the European Convention of Human Rights (ECHR). This article critically assesses the UKSC's treatment of international law in this case. It argues that the UKSCt was justified in finding that Northern Ireland's ban on abortion in cases of rape, incest, and FFA was a violation of Article 8, but that the majority erred in its assessment of Article 3 ECHR and of the relevance of international law more generally.

scholarly journals A COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF THE PRACTICE OF THE UNITED KINGDOM AND MALAYSIA IN RESPECT OF FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION

2011 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nazli Ismail @ Nawang
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
United Kingdom ◽  
International Law ◽  
Freedom Of Expression ◽  
Great Influence ◽  
European Convention ◽  
International Treaties ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
The Uk ◽  
The Right

International law, particularly treaties on human rights, has great influence on the development of the right to freedom of expression. The application of international treaties is very much dependant on the constitutions of individual countries and these constitutions to a large extent are dissimilar from one to another. The position in the United Kingdom is relatively unique since the country has no codified written constitution to safeguard the fundamental right to freedom of expression and as a result it was regarded as residual in nature. Nonetheless, the provisions of the international treaties, particularly the European Convention on the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (ECHR) have altered this position and accordingly freedom of expression has been formally incorporated into the UK law via the Human Rights Act 1998 (HRA). Meanwhile, the international human rights treaties is considered to have less influence in Malaysia arguably since the country has a written constitution (the Federal Constitution) that contains a specific part on fundamental liberties including the right to freedom of expression. Keywords: International law, treaties, freedom of expression.

scholarly journals REVIEW OF EXECUTIVE ACTION ABROAD: THE UK SUPREME COURT IN THE INTERNATIONAL LEGAL ORDER

2019 ◽  
Vol 68 (1) ◽  
pp. 35-66
Author(s):  
Andrew Sanger
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
International Law ◽  
Armed Conflicts ◽  
European Convention ◽  
English Court ◽  
English Law ◽  
Uk Supreme Court ◽  
The Uk ◽  
Tort Claims

AbstractIn January 2017, the UK Supreme Court handed down landmark judgments in three cases arising out of the UK government's conduct abroad. In Serdar Mohammed v Ministry of Defence, the Court considered whether detention in non-international armed conflicts was compatible with the right of liberty in Article 5 of the European Convention on Human Rights. The second case, Belhaj v Straw, involved an examination of the nature and scope of the foreign act of State doctrine, and its applicability as a defence to tort claims arising out of the alleged complicity of the UK Government in human rights abuses abroad. Finally, Rahmatullah v Ministry of Defence saw the Court examining the nature and scope of the Crown act of State doctrine, and its use as a defence to tort claims alleging unlawful detention and maltreatment. All three cases raise important doctrinal issues and have significant consequences for government accountability and access to a judicial remedy. At the heart of each decision is the relationship between international law and English law, including the ways in which international norms influence the development of English law and public policy, and how different interpretations of domestic law affect how judges resolve questions of international law. These cases also see the judges grapple with the role of the English court in the UK constitutional and international legal orders.

12 The Supreme Court and the European Convention on Human Rights

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dickson Brice
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
European Commission ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Human Rights Law ◽  
European Court ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Uk Supreme Court ◽  
The Uk ◽  
Proper Account

This chapter examines the engagement of the Irish Supreme Court with the European Convention on Human Rights. It reviews all of the occasions on which decisions of the Supreme Court have been reviewed by the European Commission or Court of Human Rights, cases such as Lawless, Norris, Open Door, Keegan, Heaney, Murphy, Independent News, Bosphorus Airways, McFarlane and O’Keeffe. The argument is made that, like the UK Supreme Court, Ireland’s top court has not been as committed to adopting the ECHR’s standards as it might have been and that the Court is still not adapting its own judgment-writing to take proper account of the jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights. That Court has frequently highlighted the inordinate delays which plagued the Irish Supreme Court in the 1990s. More could be done to integrate the European Court’s thinking into the way the Supreme Court goes about developing Ireland’s human rights law.

17. Freedoms and liberties in the United Kingdom

2020 ◽  
pp. 407-450
Author(s):  
Neil Parpworth
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
United Kingdom ◽  
Civil Liberties ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Bill Of Rights ◽  
Economic Rights ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
Human Rights Act ◽  
Human Rights Act 1998 ◽  
The Uk

This chapter is concerned with how freedoms and liberties might be protected in the UK. It begins with an attempt to distinguish between human rights and civil liberties, whilst recognizing that this is by no means a straightforward task. It then covers political and social or economic rights, the traditional means of protecting civil liberties in the UK, the European Convention on Human Rights, the incorporation of the Convention into English law, and judicial deference/discretionary areas of judgment. The Human Rights Act 1998 is reviewed from a protection of rights perspective. Finally, the question of a Bill of Rights for the UK is considered.

Osborn v Parole Board [2013] UKSC 61, before the UK Supreme Court

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Thomas E. Webb
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
Common Law ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Parole Board ◽  
Human Rights Act ◽  
Human Rights Act 1998 ◽  
Uk Supreme Court ◽  
The Uk ◽  
Article 5

Essential Cases: Public Law provides a bridge between course textbooks and key case judgments. This case document summarizes the facts and decision in Osborn v Parole Board [2013] UKSC 61, UK Supreme Court. This case concerned three applicants who, it was contended, had been subject to procedurally unfair processes by the Parole Board. In arguing their cases they had primarily relied upon Article 5(4) of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR). The UKSC preferred the common law principle of procedural fairness. This note examines that principle and the concept of common law rights more generally in relation to the ECHR and the Human Rights Act 1998. The document also includes supporting commentary from author Thomas Webb.

Supreme Court of the United Kingdom: To Be or Not To Be Jewish: The UK Supreme Court Answers the Question; Judgment of 16 December 2009, R v The Governing Body of JFS, 2009 UKSC 15

2010 ◽  
Vol 6 (3) ◽  
pp. 481-502
Author(s):  
Susanna Mancini
Keyword(s):  
United Kingdom ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
Ethnic Origin ◽  
Governing Body ◽  
Free School ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
Admissions Policies ◽  
Uk Supreme Court ◽  
The Uk ◽  
Jewish School

On 16 December 2009, the UK Supreme Court held a state-funded Jewish school to be guilty of discrimination based on ethnic origin in the way it operated its admissions policies. The Jewish Free School (JFS), one of the top-performing schools in the country, refused a place to a thirteen year old boy, M., because it did not consider him Jewish. It is a fundamental tenet of traditional Judaism that to be Jewish one must be born of Jewish mother or to a woman who converted into Judaism prior to his/her birth. M.'s father was Jewish by birth, but his mother, who was originally an Italian Catholic, had converted to Judaism with the criteria set by a non-orthodox branch of Judaism. The School's admissions standards only recognized orthodox criteria for conversion as valid, hence deeming neither M. nor his mother to be Jewish.

scholarly journals THE BRITISH BANK NATIONALIZATIONS: AN INTERNATIONAL LAW PERSPECTIVE

2009 ◽  
Vol 58 (1) ◽  
pp. 119-149 ◽  
Author(s):  
N Jansen Calamita
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
United Kingdom ◽  
International Law ◽  
Market Value ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Bilateral Investment Treaties ◽  
British Government ◽  
Compensation Scheme ◽  
Foreign Investors ◽  
The United Kingdom

AbstractThe British Government's nationalization of the shares of Northern Rock plc and Bradford & Bingley plc in 2008 raises important issues about the standard of protection owed to the banks' non-UK investors and the manner in which compensation should be calculated. The United Kingdom is party to numerous bilateral investment treaties as well as the European Convention on Human Rights, which adopt an international standard of protection for foreign investors and require the payment of ‘market value’ compensation for the property taken. As the analysis in this article shows, the compensation scheme established by the British Government appears to fall short of these obligations.

scholarly journals Deportation on the Basis of Diplomatic Assurances : Permissible under the European Convention on Human Rights? : a Critical Analysis of the Judgment of the ECtHR in Abu Qatada v the United Kingdom (2012) and Its Impact on the Jurisprudence of the ECtHR

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
◽  
Bernadette Sangmeister
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
United Kingdom ◽  
Critical Analysis ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Background Information ◽  
Counter Terrorism ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
The Uk ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Case Basis

<p>Inspired by the recently concluded litigation seeking to deport the radical Islamic preacher Abu Qatada from the UK to Jordan, this paper aims at examining the 2012 judgment of the ECtHR by focusing on the question under which circumstances a deportation with diplomatic assurances (DWA) may be permissible under the European Convention on Human Rights. Relevant background information will be provided concerning the interplay of the use of the DWA policy and the European Convention on Human Rights as well as concerning the particular circumstances that led to the ECtHR’s ruling in Abu Qatada. In the following analysis of the judgment, the focus will be on the interplay of the DWA policy and the European Convention on Human Rights with special regard to art 3 and art 6 of the Convention. Finally, the impact of this judgment on the future jurisprudence and the DWA policy will be shown. In the light of this judgment, it will be argued that the counter terrorism means of deporting a non-national terrorist suspect with diplomatic assurances seems to be compatible with the Convention if the diplomatic assurances given guarantee a sufficient protection of the human rights of the transferee, which due to the uncertain effects of the DWA policy, still has to be decided on a case-by-case basis.</p>

scholarly journals The Supreme Court in a final push to go beyond Strasbourg

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nuno Ferreira
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
Assisted Suicide ◽  
European Convention ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Uk

Case comment on R. (on the application of Nicklinson) v Ministry of Justice 2014 UKSC 38; 2015 A.C. 657 (SC). The case dealt mainly with the following two matters: the prohibition of assisted suicide in the UK, under the 1961 Suicide Act, and whether such prohibition is compatible with UK obligations under the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR)3; and the legality of the policy issued by the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) relating to the prosecution of individuals who have allegedly assisted a suicide.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document