Judicial Review in ec Law—Some Reflections on the Origins and the Actual Legal Situation

2002 ◽  
Vol 51 (1) ◽  
pp. 17-33 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jürgen Schwarze
Keyword(s):  
Twentieth Century ◽  
Human Rights ◽  
Judicial Review ◽  
European Convention ◽  
The Public ◽  
Administrative Action ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
Legal Situation ◽  
The Uk ◽  
Ec Law

The extent to which judicial review is granted and effectively exercised is a key element for the evaluation of any modern legal system. The principle of judicial review provides a basic protection for individuals and prevents those exercising public functions from abusing their powers to the disadvantage of the public. During the last quarter of the twentieth century, the circumstances in which the courts in the United Kingdom have been prepared to intervene in order to provide relief for unlawful administrative action have expanded in spectacular fashion.2The incorporation in the UK of the European Convention on Human Rights on 2 October 2000 in the UK marks a significant change in this field.

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 The United Kingdom’s Coronavirus Act, deprivations of liberty, and the right to liberty and security of the person

2020 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Jonathan Pugh
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Human Rights ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Human Rights Law ◽  
Legal Certainty ◽  
The Public ◽  
European Court ◽  
The Uk ◽  
The Right ◽  
Article 5

Abstract In response to the SARS-CoV-2 coronavirus pandemic the UK government has passed the Coronavirus Act 2020 (CA). Among other things, this act extends existing statutory powers to impose restrictions of liberty for public health purposes. The extension of such powers naturally raises concerns about whether their use will be compatible with human rights law. In particular, it is unclear whether their use will fall within the public heath exception to the Article 5 right to liberty and security of the person in the European Convention of Human Rights. In this paper, I outline key features of the CA, and briefly consider how the European Court of Human Rights has interpreted the public health exception to Article 5 rights. This analysis suggests two grounds on which restrictions of liberty enforced some under the CA might be vulnerable to claims of Article 5 rights violations. First, the absence of specified time limits on certain restrictions of liberty means that they may fail the requirement of legal certainty championed by the European Court in its interpretation of the public health exception. Second, the Coronavirus Act’s extension of powers to individuals lacking public health expertise may undermine the extent to which the act will ensure that deprivations of liberty are necessary and proportionate.

scholarly journals After the Honeymoon: The Uneasy Marriage of Human Rights and the Environment Under the European Convention on Human Rights and in UK Law Under the Human Rights Act 1998

2014 ◽  
Vol 43 ◽  
pp. 317-368
Author(s):  
Karen Morrow
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
European Convention ◽  
The Right To Privacy ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
Protection Of Human Rights ◽  
Human Rights Act ◽  
Human Rights Act 1998 ◽  
The Uk ◽  
The Right ◽  
Domestic Law

The European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (1950) (ECHR) regime has, in the absence of specific coverage of environmental rights, developed a “creative” approach in its jurisprudence in this area, pressing a variety of other rights, notably: Article 6 (the right to a fair hearing); Article 8 (the right to privacy and family life); and Article 1 to the First Protocol of the ECHR (the right to enjoyment of property) into service. This creativity has achieved much in according indirect protection to individuals in this regard, but has also placed additional pressure on the already congested Convention system. The entry into force of the Human Rights Act 1998 (HRA) made long-held rights under the ECHR directly accessible in domestic law in the United Kingdom. This naturally spawned a wave of litigation. One of the most prominently litigated areas concerned the pursuit of a variety of environment-based rights claims. In the intervening decade, the application of the ECHR to environmental claims in the UK courts has generated somewhat mixed results. This is in part a result of the “patchwork” approach that has developed toward environmental claims within the Convention regime itself, but it is also a product of the nature of the relationship between the ECHR and domestic law and the content and ethos of both regimes. This article will conclude by briefly considering the on-going role of the ECHR regime in environmental cases in light of subsequent developments in this area of law, notably under the Aarhus Convention.

Human Rights: Have the Public Benefited?

2003 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lord Woolf
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
United Kingdom ◽  
Second World War ◽  
European Convention ◽  
World War ◽  
The Public ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
Second World

This lecture discusses the European Convention of Human Rights (ECHR), which was established due to the atrocities committed by the Nazis during the Second World War. It looks at the scale of the changes that occurred in constitutional arrangements, and considers the fact that these changes have been achieved without damaging the underlying constitutional arrangements and traditions of the United Kingdom. The lecture also considers whether these changes would benefit the public, and studies some of the arguments that are both in favour of and against the ECHR in becoming a part of the country's law.

Public Authority Liability in the United Kingdom

2020 ◽  
pp. 80-86
Author(s):  
Gordon Anthony
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Public Authorities ◽  
Natural Justice ◽  
Administrative Procedure ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
European Court ◽  
External Sources ◽  
Human Rights Act ◽  
The Uk

Although the UK has not what would be recognized by other legal systems as a general principle of damages liability concerning public authorities, there is no general shield of immunity for them. Nor is there a separate, or dedicated, system of courts that deals with administrative liability. Finally, there is no such thing as a codification of administrative procedure. However, the rules of administrative procedure can be found not only in common law (the rules of ‘natural justice’ or ‘fairness’, i.e. the rule against bias and audi alteram partem) and in statute law, but also in external sources, such as the European Convention on Human Rights, in particular, in Article 6. The latter has obviously influenced case law under the Human Rights Act, notably through the requirement that UK courts take into account the jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights. Considered as a whole, these sources set out standards of procedural fairness and propriety which must be respected by public authorities.

EU Countries and the UK

2021 ◽  
pp. 295-306
Author(s):  
Mads Andenas
Keyword(s):  
Judicial Review ◽  
Rapid Development ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Court System ◽  
Eu Countries ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
The Common ◽  
The Uk ◽  
The Relationship

This chapter compares European Union countries to the United Kingdom. It aims at ascertaining not so much whether a common core exists but how it is shaped and evolves, also in response to influences by supranational legal orders. EU countries do not adhere to one model. Administrative law is subject to rapid development, and even countries that share many structures and general features do not develop at the same speed or in the same direction. In the UK, there is no specialized administrative court jurisdiction. There is one general court system that deals with civil, criminal, and administrative cases; but there are many administrative tribunals and appeals tribunals. Nearly all the EU countries have a specialised administrative court system, and the majority has a constitutional court. The chapter considers the perceived divide between civil law countries and the common law in the UK, in the light of the relationship between national law and EU and European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) law. It also looks at the four main features of the legal systems selected for comparison: the constitutional relevance of judicial review; the limitations of judicial review; procedural errors or omissions; and annulment and damages.

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.

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 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.

United Kingdom

2021 ◽  
pp. 89-108
Author(s):  
Christian Leuprecht
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
United Kingdom ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Intelligence Community ◽  
State Security ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
Accountability System ◽  
European Court ◽  
Legal Challenges ◽  
The Uk

The United Kingdom’s intelligence accountability system reviews and oversees the Five Eyes’ oldest intelligence and security community. Her Majesty’s intelligence community illustrates the challenge of managing the tension between state security with human security: a cycle of reform driven in an attempt to (re)gain the trust of a sceptical UK public and in response to technological progression. Over the course of the last century, the UK and its intelligence and security agencies (ISAs) assisted other Five Eyes members in establishing their own ISAs, while its cycle of reform has had equally important ramifications for driving innovation in intelligence accountability across the Five Eyes community. Controversies have undermined the prospect for public trust on which the legitimacy of the UK’s intelligence community ultimately depends. Changes from the initial focus on general administrative and executive review and oversight were driven by domestic and transnational legal challenges. The European Convention on Human Rights and the European Court of Human Rights have had a notable impact on security and intelligence in the United Kingdom. The chapter reviews the member organizations of the UK’s intelligence community, the strategic environment that has informed intelligence and accountability in the UK, national security threats from the vantage point of the UK, and the UK’s intelligence accountability architecture: the Investigatory Powers Commissioner and Judicial Commissioners Office, the Investigatory Powers Tribunal, the Intelligence and Security Committee composed of members of both Houses of Parliament, and the Independent Reviewer of Terrorism Legislation.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document