The United Kingdom's Human Rights Act 1998 in Theory and Practice

2001 ◽  
Vol 50 (4) ◽  
pp. 901-953 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dominic McGoldrick
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Legal Theory ◽  
Freedom Of Expression ◽  
Theory And Practice ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Public Authorities ◽  
Margin Of Appreciation ◽  
Statutory Duty ◽  
Human Rights Act ◽  
Human Rights Act 1998

Thisessay assesses the significance of the United Kingdom's Human Rights Act (HRA) 1998 on legal theory and practice. Part II considers its constitutional context and significance; Part III deals with whether the European Convention on Human Rights has been ‘incorporated’. Part IV deals with its entry into force. The two principal methods used by the HRA to relate to (1) statutory interpretation and (2) a duty on public authorities or those exercising public functions. We consider these in turn. Part V analyses the interpretative obligation contained in the Act, the power for higher courts to make a ‘declaration of incompatibility’, and effects of such a declaration. Part VI explores the new statutory duty imposed by the Act. Part VII assesses the Act's remedial provisions. Part VIII notes the particular provision made for freedom of expression and freedom of religion. Part IX discusses the issues of ‘horizontal effect’ and the ‘margin of appreciation’. Part X concludes with an assessment of the significance of the HRA on legal theory and practice—just how big a difference has it made and will it make?

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.

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.

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

2021 ◽  
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.

Remedies and Sanctions

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Matthew Nicklin QC ◽  
Chloe Strong
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Freedom Of Expression ◽  
Personal Information ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Criminal Sanctions ◽  
Legal Remedies ◽  
Human Rights Act ◽  
Human Rights Act 1998 ◽  
The Media ◽  
The Right

This chapter considers the legal remedies that may be available to those who complain that an invasion of their privacy has occurred or is threatened by the actions of the media, as well as touching briefly on the criminal sanctions that may be applicable. Regulatory remedies under the Data Protection Act are considered in Chapter 7 and the remedies available from the media regulators in Chapter 14. Whether a remedy is sought before or after publication, and whether the complaint relates to the content of an actual or proposed publication or the method by which personal information has been obtained, it is likely that any relief granted will affect the exercise of the right to freedom of expression enshrined in Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR). In such circumstances s 12 of the Human Rights Act 1998 (HRA) applies. The interpretation given to this important statutory provision by the courts is considered in Section C, but this chapter begins by looking at Parliament’s intention in enacting s 12. This is not necessarily to suggest that courts should have regard to such material as an aid to construction under the rule in Pepper v Hart but rather to explain the legislative background to this highly relevant provision.

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.

8. Liability of Public and Statutory Bodies

2019 ◽  
pp. 295-342
Author(s):  
Simon Deakin ◽  
Zoe Adams
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Supreme Court Decision ◽  
Public Law ◽  
Tort Liability ◽  
Public Authorities ◽  
Statutory Duty ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Human Rights Act ◽  
Human Rights Act 1998 ◽  
The Government

This chapter discusses the distinctive nature of the liability of the government, public authorities, and statutory bodies; the liability of statutory bodies in negligence; liability for breach of statutory duty; public law as a source of liability; public law as a source of immunity; Crown proceedings in tort; liability for breaches of EU law; and liabilities arising under the Human Rights Act 1998. The chapter explores in detail the question of whether public authorities, and the police in particular, are under a duty of care when undertaking and performing their operational duties, in light of the Supreme Court decision in Robinson v. Chief Constable of West Yorkshire. In turn, it teases out some of the broader implications of what is a rapidly evolving, and politically sensitive, aspect of the law.

Direct action, Convention values and the Human Rights Act

Legal Studies ◽  
2001 ◽  
Vol 21 (4) ◽  
pp. 535-568 ◽  
Author(s):  
Helen Fenwick ◽  
Gavin Phillipson
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Direct Action ◽  
Case Law ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Free Expression ◽  
Public Order ◽  
Public Authorities ◽  
Human Rights Act ◽  
Human Rights Act 1998

The direct action form of protest is becoming an increasingly significant form of political expression. This paper considers such protest in relation to the guarantees of free expression and peaceful assembly under arts 10 and 11 of the European Convention on Human Rights, now binding on United Kingdom public authorities under the Human Rights Act 1998. Its aim is to set out a framework of principle which would guide and underpin judicial approaches to the application of the Convention to domestic criminal law aimed at such protest, specifically ss 68 and 69 of the Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994. It argues that, because of the deficiencies of the Strasbourg case law in this area, an activist judicial stance, one reliant on underlying Convention values, will be required if there is to be any significant change to the traditional, illiberal domestic approach to direct action.

15. Privacy

2021 ◽  
pp. 186-198
Author(s):  
Carol Brennan
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Private Information ◽  
Family Life ◽  
Freedom Of Expression ◽  
European Convention ◽  
House Of Lords ◽  
Human Rights Act ◽  
Human Rights Act 1998 ◽  
New Perspective ◽  
Domestic Law

This chapter discusses the law on the protection of privacy. The passage of the Human Rights Act 1998, incorporating the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) into domestic law, enabled a new perspective on the question of protection of privacy, previously not covered by a specific tort. The art 8 right to respect for private and family life must be balanced with the equally powerful art 10 right to freedom of expression. Campbell v MGN (2004) provides a detailed consideration of this area of law by the House of Lords. The chapter covers the action for misuse of private information, the issue of photography, and that of remedies.

Defamation, qualified privilege and the European Convention on Human Rights

1999 ◽  
Vol 58 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-48
Author(s):  
Richard Mullender
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Freedom Of Expression ◽  
European Convention ◽  
House Of Lords ◽  
Human Rights Act ◽  
Human Rights Act 1998 ◽  
Significant Measure ◽  
Expressive Activity ◽  
The Right ◽  
Court Of Appeal

DEFAMATION law protects reputation while affording a significant measure of protection to freedom of expression. Valuable expressive activity is protected by, inter alia, a number of defences, including qualified privilege. In order successfully to invoke this defence, defendants who honestly believe their–factually false–statements to be true must meet two requirements. First, they must establish “an interest or a duty, legal, social, or moral”, to communicate the relevant material to another (or others). Secondly, the recipient of the material must be shown to have “a corresponding interest or duty to receive it”. (See Adam v. Ward [1917] A.C. 309, p. 334, per Lord Atkinson.) The requirements of the qualified privilege defence have recently been glossed by the Court of Appeal in Reynolds v. Times Newspapers and Others [1998] 3 W.L.R. 862 (which is on appeal to the House of Lords). While the Court can be regarded as having extended the defence's scope, the position it has staked out is not, in all respects, clear. As a result the qualified privilege defence may fail to meet the requirements of the right to freedom of expression enunciated in Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights (E.C.H.R.). (When the Human Rights Act 1998 comes into force, the E.C.H.R. will be an element of domestic law.)

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.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document