Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards

2019 ◽  
Vol 13 (1) ◽  
pp. 53-58
Author(s):  
Amanda McSorley

Article 5 of the Human Rights Act, 1998 states that: ‘Everyone has the right to liberty and security of person. No-one shall be deprived of his or her liberty unless in accordance with a procedure prescribed in law.’ However, there are occasions when it is necessary and appropriate to deprive a person of their liberty in order to keep them safe from harm. Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards are the legal framework introduced in 2009 to ensure that this occurs only when absolutely necessary and no alternative, less restrictive measures can be utilised to ensure safe care. This article outlines the key points relating to DOLS, considering how they relate to GPs during their training and careers.

2017 ◽  
Vol 19 (1) ◽  
pp. 35-42 ◽  
Author(s):  
Behrad Baharlo ◽  
Daniele Bryden ◽  
Stephen J Brett

The right to liberty and security of the person is protected by Article 5 of the European Convention on Human Rights which has been incorporated into the Human Rights Act 1998. The 2014 Supreme Court judgment in the case commonly known as Cheshire West provided for an ‘acid test’ to be employed in establishing a deprivation of liberty. This ‘acid test’ of ‘continuous supervision and not free to leave’ led to concerns that patients lacking capacity being treated on an Intensive Care Unit could be at risk of a ‘deprivation of liberty’, if this authority was applicable to this setting. This article revisits the aftermath of Cheshire West before describing the recent legal developments around deprivation of liberty pertaining to intensive care by summarising the recent Ferreira judgments which appear for now to answer the question as to the applicability of Cheshire West in life-saving treatment.


2021 ◽  
pp. 114-129
Author(s):  
Howard Davis

Without assuming prior legal knowledge, books in the Directions series introduce and guide readers through key points of law and legal debate. Questions, discussion points, and thinking points help readers to engage fully with each subject and check their understanding as they progress and knowledge can be tested by self-test questions and exam questions at the chapter end. This chapter continues the analysis of the Human Rights Act. It discusses how cases can be brought under the Human Rights Act 1998 (HRA) and what remedies are available from the courts if a violation of a Convention right is found. The aim here is to delve deeper into the issue of how the rights of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) are given further effect in the law of the UK by the HRA. The main issues discussed in the chapter include the importance of remedies and Article 13 ECHR—the right to a remedy, procedural issues for seeking remedies under the HRA, and remedies available under the HRA.


Author(s):  
Bernadette Rainey

Each Concentrate revision guide is packed with essential information, key cases, revision tips, exam Q&As, and more. Concentrates show you what to expect in a law exam, what examiners are looking for, and how to achieve extra marks. This chapter focuses on the right to liberty and fair trial, which are not qualified rights but can be derogated from in times of war and emergency, and provides an overview of the European Convention on Human Rights’ (ECHR) Articles 5 and 6, the most commonly argued rights before the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR). Article 5 on the right to liberty and security of person protects individuals from unlawful and arbitrary detention, whereas Article 6 protects the rights to fair trial in both criminal and civil cases (with added protection in criminal cases). The ECtHR has expanded protection of Article 6 through its interpretation of ‘fair’ hearing and ‘civil’ rights and obligations. The chapter examines due process rights as part of UK law, including the Human Rights Act 1998 (HRA).


2010 ◽  
Vol 16 (4) ◽  
pp. 263-271 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sanjay Khurmi ◽  
Martin Curtice

SummaryThe introduction of the supervised community treatment order (CTO) was a major and significant change to the Mental Health Act 1983 following the 2007 amendments to the Act. Owing to paternalistic aspects of psychiatry, such new legislation brings with it the potential to impinge on the human rights of patients. Any new legislation must be read and implemented to be compliant with the Human Rights Act 1998. Of all the articles comprising the Human Rights Act, Article 3 (the right to freedom from inhuman and degrading treatment), Article 5 (the right to liberty and security) and Article 8 (the right to respect for family and private life, home and correspondence) are of particular relevance to CTOs. We consider here the potential implications of the use of CTOs with regard to the Human Rights Act.


Author(s):  
Mark Lunney ◽  
Donal Nolan ◽  
Ken Oliphant

The right of privacy under Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights was incorporated into English law by the Human Rights Act 1998, but English law as yet recognises no tort of invasion of privacy as such. Admittedly, a number of specific torts protect particular aspects of privacy, but this protection may be regarded as haphazard, incidental, and incomplete. Recent decisions, however, have seen substantial developments in the protection given to particular privacy interests, above all by adapting the law of breach of confidence to provide a remedy against the unauthorised disclosure of personal information. These issues are discussed in this chapter.


Author(s):  
Ruth Costigan ◽  
Richard Stone

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.


2019 ◽  
pp. 441-475
Author(s):  
Kirsty Horsey ◽  
Erika Rackley

This chapter considers two ‘land torts’: trespass to land and private nuisance. Trespass to land protects a person in possession of land against direct invasion of his property. The right to sue includes not only those with a proprietorial interest in the land, such as owners and tenants, but also those who have exclusive occupation such as squatters. The fact that any invasion of land, however minute and whether it causes damage or not, is a trespass, indicates that the primary function of this tort is to protect rights in property, rather than simply to provide compensation. The chapter continues by distinguishing between public and private nuisance. It then discusses the interests protected in private nuisance; the standard of reasonable user; the person(s) liable for nuisance; remoteness of damage; statutory authority and planning permission; and the effect of the Human Rights Act 1998 on nuisance claims.


Author(s):  
Vera Bermingham ◽  
Carol Brennan

Without assuming prior legal knowledge, books in the Directions series introduce and guide readers through key points of law and legal debate. Questions, diagrams, and exercises help readers to engage fully with each subject and check their understanding as they progress. The Calcutt Committee Report on Privacy and Related Matters (1990) defines privacy as ‘the right of the individual to be protected against intrusion into his personal life or affairs, or those of his family, by direct physical means or by publication of information’. While a number of different torts indirectly address wrongful intrusion into another’s privacy, English law has not directly protected privacy in its own right. It was the Human Rights Act 1998 that has made it possible to use breach of confidence in regulating the publication of private information. This chapter looks at the history of the protection of privacy in English law, discusses the current legal approaches to privacy, examines the impact of the Human Rights Act 1998 on this developing area of law, and evaluates English law on privacy in an international context.


2014 ◽  
Vol 43 ◽  
pp. 317-368
Author(s):  
Karen Morrow

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.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document