Context and Background

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Adam Wolanski ◽  
Victoria Shore
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Common Law ◽  
Right To Privacy ◽  
Human Rights Act ◽  
Human Rights Act 1998 ◽  
The Law ◽  
Prevailing View

The law of privacy has come a long way since the Human Rights Act 1998 (HRA) came into force in October 2000. Before then, the prevailing view was that there was no right to privacy at common law and that it had ‘so long been disregarded here that it can be recognised only by the legislature’. Instead, indirect, piecemeal protection of privacy was afforded through existing causes of action where the facts of individual cases permitted it. Despite judicial dicta leaving the question open, this appears to have remained the position at least until the HRA came into force.

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. 

11. Judge-made law

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Neil Parpworth
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Common Law ◽  
Human Rights Act ◽  
Human Rights Act 1998 ◽  
The Common ◽  
The Law ◽  
The Uk

This chapter considers a further source of the UK constitution: the law made by the judicial branch of government as a result of the cases heard by the courts. Today it is widely accepted that judge-made law is a reality. It takes two main forms: the development of the common law; or the interpretation of statutes. The two main approaches of the courts to interpretation of Acts of Parliament—the literal approach and the purposive approach—are discussed. The interpretative obligation imposed on the courts by s 3 of the Human Rights Act 1998 is also reviewed.

11. Judge-made law

2020 ◽  
pp. 243-250
Author(s):  
Neil Parpworth
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Common Law ◽  
Human Rights Act ◽  
Human Rights Act 1998 ◽  
The Common ◽  
The Law ◽  
The Uk

This chapter considers a further source of the UK constitution: the law that is made by the judicial branch of government as a result of the cases heard by the courts. Today it is widely accepted that judge-made law is a reality. It takes two main forms: the development of the common law; or the interpretation of statutes. The two main approaches of the courts to interpretation of Acts of Parliament—the literal approach and the purposive approach—are discussed. In addition, the interpretative obligation imposed on the courts by s 3 of the Human Rights Act 1998 is also reviewed.

14. Privacy

Tort Law ◽  
2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jenny Steele
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Private Information ◽  
Common Law ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Invasion Of Privacy ◽  
Human Rights Act ◽  
Human Rights Act 1998 ◽  
The Law ◽  
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 focuses on the emergence of a new action to protect privacy under the Human Rights Act 1998, with particular reference to unjustified publication of private information. It begins by considering whether privacy is a protected interest at common law and whether privacy must be recognised and given protection through the law of tort. It then examines the tools which have been used in the partial absorption of privacy as a protected interest in common law, citing the provisions of the Human Rights Act 1998 and Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights. The controversies surrounding disclosure of private information and the power of injunctions are also considered, along with the issue of intrusion as an invasion of privacy.

scholarly journals Medical records: Disclosing confidential clinical information

2004 ◽  
Vol 28 (2) ◽  
pp. 53-56 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bridget Dolan
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Medical Records ◽  
Medical Information ◽  
Common Law ◽  
Clinical Information ◽  
Right To Privacy ◽  
Human Rights Act ◽  
Human Rights Act 1998

Although our courts remain reluctant to create any general right to privacy, whether under common law or even by virtue of statutes such as the Human Rights Act 1998, one important aspect of privacy is recognised in common law – that of the confidentiality of medical information.

Medical information, confidentiality and a child’s right to privacy

Legal Studies ◽  
2003 ◽  
Vol 23 (3) ◽  
pp. 510-535 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joan Loughrey
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Medical Information ◽  
Legal Basis ◽  
Right To Privacy ◽  
Human Rights Act ◽  
Human Rights Act 1998 ◽  
Information Confidentiality ◽  
The Law

Following the Gillick case in 1986, it was recognised that mature minors were owed a duty of confidentiality in respect of their medical information. Subsequent cases confirmed that the duty was also owed to non-competent children, including infants, but without explaining the basis for finding the existence of such a duty and its scope. It is particularly unclear when and upon what legal basis a doctor could disclose information to parents when their child wished to keep it confidential. This paper will examine the law of confidentiality as it applies to children, identifying issues which are problematic. Developments in the law of personal confidences which have taken place as a result of the Human Rights Act 1998, and the recognition of Article 8 rights as part of the law, will be reviewed and analysed from the perspective of the duty of confidence owed to children in respect of their medical information. Finally, the paper will offer an explanation of a basis for disclosure to parents which minimises violations of a minor's autonomy.

1. Introduction

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-26
Author(s):  
Andrew L-T Choo
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Direct Evidence ◽  
Circumstantial Evidence ◽  
Law Reform ◽  
Human Rights Act ◽  
Human Rights Act 1998 ◽  
Basic Concepts ◽  
The Law ◽  
Law Of Evidence

Chapter 1 examines a number of basic concepts and distinctions in the law of evidence. It covers facts in issue and collateral facts; relevance, admissibility, and weight; direct evidence and circumstantial evidence; testimonial evidence and real evidence; the allocation of responsibility; exclusionary rules and exclusionary discretions; free(r) proof; issues in criminal evidence; civil evidence and criminal evidence; the implications of trial by jury; summary trials; law reform; and the implications of the Human Rights Act 1998. This chapter also presents an overview of the subsequent chapters.

4. Personal Liberty (Article 5) II: Detention and Questioning

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ruth Costigan ◽  
Richard Stone
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Sufficient Evidence ◽  
Police Station ◽  
Personal Liberty ◽  
Human Rights Act ◽  
Human Rights Act 1998 ◽  
The Law ◽  
Article 5

Course-focused and comprehensive, the Textbook on series provide an accessible overview of the key areas on the law curriculum. This chapter examines the issues arising from more extended detention, generally at a police station. It focuses on the grounds for such extended detention prior to charge, and the procedures which must be adopted in relation to it. It considers the rights of a citizen who is a ‘suspect’ but against whom the police do not have sufficient evidence to charge with an offence. Relevant provisions under the Human Rights Act 1998 and the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 are discussed.

15. The European Convention on Human Rights and the Human Rights Act 1998

Public Law ◽  
2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
John Stanton ◽  
Craig Prescott
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Common Law ◽  
Civil Liberties ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Bill Of Rights ◽  
Rights Protection ◽  
Positive Rights ◽  
Human Rights Act ◽  
Human Rights Act 1998 ◽  
The Uk

One of the most fundamental aspects of any constitution are the provisions and measures that protect the rights and freedoms of individuals. In the UK, rights protection is markedly different to that in America, in chief because there is no entrenched Bill of Rights. Rights protection is dominated by the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), incorporated by the Human Rights Act 1998, which sets out a number of positive rights that are actionable in the UK courts This chapter discusses the ways in which these rights are protected in the UK Constitution. It discusses the courts' historic civil liberties approach and common law protection of rights, before then examining the development, incorporation, and application of the ECHR. The chapter also explores the way in which the various sections of the Human Rights Act 1998 work to ensure appropriate enforcement and protection of rights in UK law.

20. Human Rights IV: The Impact of the Human Rights Act 1998

2021 ◽  
pp. 528-578
Author(s):  
Ian Loveland
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Common Law ◽  
The Rule Of Law ◽  
The Status ◽  
Legislative Policy ◽  
Human Rights Act ◽  
Human Rights Act 1998 ◽  
Executive Action ◽  
The Common ◽  
The Impact

This chapter analyses some of the leading cases in which the courts addressed different aspects of the Human Rights Act 1998, and draws out the constitutional implications of the courts’ initial conclusions. The discussions cover the interlinked issues of the extent to which the courts have recognised a distinction between Convention articles and Convention Rights, the approach taken to statutory interpretation mandated by s 3, and the use of Declarations of Incompatibility under s 4; the doctrine of judicial ‘deference’ to legislative policy decisions; the ‘horizontality’ of the Act and its impact on the development of the common law; and the status of proportionality as a ground of review of executive action. The chapter concludes with an assessment of whether the Act has triggered a shift in understandings on the proper scope of the doctrines of the sovereignty of Parliament and the rule of law within the modern constitutional order.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document