EC Law, UK Public Law and The Human Rights Act 1998: A New Integrative Dynamic?

1999 ◽  
Vol 2 ◽  
pp. 417-437
Author(s):  
Gordon Anthony
Keyword(s):  
Public Law ◽  
Legal Order ◽  
National Courts ◽  
General Terms ◽  
European Court ◽  
Human Rights Act ◽  
Human Rights Act 1998 ◽  
The Law ◽  
Ec Law ◽  
The Relationship

The process of European legal integration has long been understood to engage the workings of domestic legal orders, EC law and, to a lesser extent, the law of the ECHR. In general terms, the relationship between these bodies of law has been characterised as involving the direct and indirect interchange of principle and practice across jurisdictions. An example of direct interchange is found in the EC law requirement that national courts give effect to rules emanating from the EC legal order in all cases raising EC law issues. The indirect form occurs in disputes which do not raise EC law issues but which see national courts voluntarily borrow from their experience within the EC legal order by way of developing the domestic legal system. Likewise, national courts and the European Court of Justice have relied upon the law of the ECHR, a “foreign” body of rules, in developing their respective legal orders.

EC Law, UK Public Law and The Human Rights Act 1998: A New Integrative Dynamic?

1999 ◽  
Vol 2 ◽  
pp. 417-437 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gordon Anthony
Keyword(s):  
Public Law ◽  
Legal Order ◽  
National Courts ◽  
General Terms ◽  
European Court ◽  
Human Rights Act ◽  
Human Rights Act 1998 ◽  
The Law ◽  
Ec Law ◽  
The Relationship

The process of European legal integration has long been understood to engage the workings of domestic legal orders, EC law and, to a lesser extent, the law of the ECHR. In general terms, the relationship between these bodies of law has been characterised as involving the direct and indirect interchange of principle and practice across jurisdictions. An example of direct interchange is found in the EC law requirement that national courts give effect to rules emanating from the EC legal order in all cases raising EC law issues. The indirect form occurs in disputes which do not raise EC law issues but which see national courts voluntarily borrow from their experience within the EC legal order by way of developing the domestic legal system. Likewise, national courts and the European Court of Justice have relied upon the law of the ECHR, a “foreign” body of rules, in developing their respective legal orders.

Public Law Directions

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anne Dennett
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Practical Importance ◽  
Public Law ◽  
Practical Application ◽  
Human Rights Act ◽  
Human Rights Act 1998 ◽  
The Law ◽  
The Individual ◽  
The Uk ◽  
The Relationship

Public Law Directions provides a balance of depth, detail, context, and critique. The aim is to empower readers to evaluate the law, understand its practical application, and confidently approach assessments. The text offers scene-setting introductions and highlighted case extracts, the practical importance of the law becomes clear. It shows readers when and how to critically evaluate the law by introducing the key areas of debate and encourages a questioning attitude towards the law. Topics covered include: the UK constitution; constitutional principles and values; power in the UK including an examination of the three arms of state; an analysis of the relationship between the individual and the state; and a close examination of human rights, including a look at the Human Rights Act 1998.

Public Law Directions

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anne Dennett
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Practical Importance ◽  
Public Law ◽  
Practical Application ◽  
Human Rights Act ◽  
Human Rights Act 1998 ◽  
The Law ◽  
The Individual ◽  
The Uk ◽  
The Relationship

Public Law Directions provides a balance of depth, detail, context, and critique. The aim is to empower readers to evaluate the law, understand its practical application, and confidently approach assessments. The text offers scene-setting introductions and highlighted case extracts, making the practical importance of the law clear. It shows readers when and how to critically evaluate the law by introducing the key areas of debate and encourages a questioning attitude towards the law. Topics covered include: the UK constitution; constitutional principles and values; power in the UK including an examination of the three arms of state; an analysis of the relationship between the individual and the state; and a close examination of human rights, including a look at the Human Rights Act 1998.

R v Secretary of State for the Home Department, ex parte Simms [1999] UKHL 33, in the House of Lords

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Thomas E. Webb
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Public Law ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Secretary Of State ◽  
Parliamentary Sovereignty ◽  
House Of Lords ◽  
Human Rights Act ◽  
Human Rights Act 1998 ◽  
Home Department ◽  
The Relationship

Essential Cases: Public Law provides a bridge between course textbooks and key case judgments. This case document summarizes the facts and decision in R v Secretary of State for the Home Department, ex parte Simms [1999] UKHL 33, House of Lords. The case considered whether the Secretary of State, and prison governors, could restrict prisoners’ access to journalists investigating alleged miscarriages of justice. In addition to the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) Article 10 issues this raises, Lord Hoffmann also in obiter dicta discussed the relationship between the Human Rights Act 1998, parliamentary sovereignty, and the concept of legality. The document also includes supporting commentary from author Thomas Webb.

did not intend to legislate contrary to the ECHR. Therefore, if during the course of statutory interpretation there were two possible interpretations, one in conformity with the Convention and one not in conformity with the Convention, the interpretation in conformity with the Convention should be preferred. The House of Lords, however, was careful to stress that it should not be assumed that such an interpretation must be applied. Judicial discretion remained. 5.4.3.2 Human Rights Act 1998 The relationship between the UK and the ECHR was changed in 1998 with the incorporation of the majority of the rights in the ECHR into English law. The enforcement procedures and processes in the Convention were not incorporatedonly the majority of rights and this is potentially a problem. For example, Article 13 of the ECHR places a duty on every Member State to provide an effective remedy in national courts for infringement of the Convention. This has not been incorporated. The HRA 1998 was enacted with an ‘in force’ date for the majority of its sections of October 2000. UK citizens can now bring actions under the ECHR in English courts under domestic law. The Act sets out the Convention rights incorporated into the English legal system in Schedule 1. Consider the text of s 1, set out in Figure 5.8, below, and note the process used to lay out what is and what is not included in the Act. The long title of the Act gives an indication of the purpose of the Act. The two rights not referred to relate to Article 2: Everyone’s right to life shall be protected by law. No one shall be deprived of his life intentionally save in the execution of a sentence of a court following his conviction of a crime for which this penalty is provided by law… and to Article 13 which requires every State to ensure that there are appropriate and effective remedies in the national courts. At the level of the ECtHR, the procedure for bringing an action is generally as follows.

2012 ◽  
pp. 137-137
Keyword(s):  
Judicial Discretion ◽  
Right To Life ◽  
National Courts ◽  
House Of Lords ◽  
Human Rights Act ◽  
Human Rights Act 1998 ◽  
Effective Remedy ◽  
The Uk ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
Domestic Law

Handyside v United Kingdom (1979–80) 1 EHRR 737, European Court of Human Rights

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Thomas E. Webb
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
United Kingdom ◽  
Public Law ◽  
European Convention ◽  
European Court ◽  
Margin Of Appreciation ◽  
Human Rights Act ◽  
Human Rights Act 1998 ◽  
Domestic Law

Essential Cases: Public Law provides a bridge between course textbooks and key case judgments. This case document summarizes the facts and decision in Handyside v United Kingdom (1979-80) 1 EHRR 737, European Court of Human Rights. This case concerned a book which breached the Obscene Publications Act 1959. The publisher, Handyside, contended that the domestic law (the 1959 Act) breached his Article 10 rights under the European Convention on Human Rights. The case introduced the concept of the ‘margin of appreciation’ accorded to states as regards the implementation of convention rights. The case predates the passage of the Human Rights Act 1998. The document also includes supporting commentary from author Thomas Webb.

Mosely v United Kingdom [2011] ECHR 774, European Court of Human Rights

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Thomas E. Webb
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
United Kingdom ◽  
Public Law ◽  
European Convention ◽  
European Court ◽  
Human Rights Act ◽  
Human Rights Act 1998

Essential Cases: Public Law provides a bridge between course textbooks and key case judgments. This case document summarizes the facts and decision in Mosely v United Kingdom [2011] ECHR 774, European Court of Human Rights. This case provides an exemplar of the challenges of balancing Article 8 and Article 10 rights under the Human Rights Act 1998 and the European Convention on Human Rights in the context of press regulation. The document also includes supporting commentary from author Thomas Webb.

scholarly journals Smith v Chief Constable of Sussex Police; [2008] UKHL; 50

2012 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
pp. 141-152
Author(s):  
Carol Brennan
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Common Law ◽  
Law Reform ◽  
House Of Lords ◽  
Human Rights Act ◽  
Human Rights Act 1998 ◽  
The Common ◽  
The Law ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
Exclusive Focus

WHO HAS FIRST CLAIM ON “THE LOYALTY OF THE LAW”?Smith v Chief Constable of the Sussex Police (hereafter Smith) was heard by the House of Lords at the same time as Chief Constable of the Hertfordshire Police v Van Colle and another because they had two uniting factors. First, they both concerned the recurring question of the ambit of police liability in the situation described by Lord Bingham thus: “…if the police are alerted to a threat that D may kill or inflict violence on V, and the police take no action to prevent that occurrence, and D does kill or inflict violence on V, may V or his relatives obtain civil redress against the police, and if so, how and in what circumstances?”2  Secondly, considering the cases together highlighted the wider issue of the relationship between decisions under the Human Rights Act 1998 (hereafter the HRA) and the development of the common law. The Law Lords embarked on a more extensive examination of these issues in Smith and thus that case will be the exclusive focus of this note.  In addition, the study of Smith raises questions regarding proposals for law reform as well as about judicial perceptions of policy priorities. 

9. The Relationship Between EU Law and National Law:

2015 ◽  
Author(s):  
Paul Craig ◽  
Gráinne de Búrca
Keyword(s):  
Legal Order ◽  
Common Market ◽  
European Court Of Justice ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
National Courts ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
European Court ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
Academic Debate

All books in this flagship series contain carefully selected substantial extracts from key cases, legislation, and academic debate, providing able students with a stand-alone resource. This chapter discusses the doctrine of supremacy of EU law, which was developed by the European Court of Justice (ECJ) based on its conception of the ‘new legal order’. The ECJ ruled that the aim of creating a uniform common market between different states would be undermined if EU law could be made subordinate to national law of the various states. The validity of EU law can therefore, according to the ECJ, never be assessed by reference to national law. National courts are required to give immediate effect to EU law, of whatever rank, in cases that arise before them, and to ignore or to set aside any national law, of whatever rank, which could impede the application of EU law. Thus, according to the ECJ, any norm of EU law takes precedence over any provision of national law, including the national constitutions. This broad assertion of the supremacy of EU law has not however been accepted without qualification by national courts, and the chapter examines the nature of the qualifications that have been imposed by some national courts.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document