scholarly journals Article 3 of the Human Rights Act 1998 and the treatment of prisoners

2010 ◽  
Vol 16 (2) ◽  
pp. 105-114 ◽  
Author(s):  
Martin Curtice ◽  
John Sandford
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Case Law ◽  
The State ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Progressive Improvement ◽  
Human Rights Act ◽  
Human Rights Act 1998 ◽  
Degrading Treatment ◽  
John Howard

SummaryThe humane treatment of prisoners has long been considered a mark of a civilised society. Early prison reformers such as Elizabeth Fry and John Howard campaigned vigorously for the improvement of conditions for inmates and for institutions to be focused as much on reform and rehabilitation as on punishment. This progressive improvement in conditions for those imprisoned has been further advanced by the European Convention on Human Rights and its incorporation into UK law. The Human Rights Act 1998 is playing an ever-increasing role in determining the standards of treatment of those detained by the state. Article 3 of the Act – freedom from torture and inhuman and degrading treatment – is of particular importance for those detained in prisons, hospitals and other institutions. As Article 3 case law has evolved, so its interpretation has broadened to include a thorough scrutiny of prison conditions, prison healthcare and the treatment of prisoners in general.

scholarly journals The European Convention on Human Rights Act 2003 – Ten Years On

2014 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
pp. 61-96
Author(s):  
Ronagh JA McQuigg
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
The State ◽  
European Convention ◽  
General Level ◽  
Human Rights Act ◽  
Human Rights Act 1998 ◽  
The Impact ◽  
The Relationship

The European Convention on Human Rights Act 2003 has now been in force in Ireland for ten years. This article analyses the Act itself and the impact which it has had on the Irish courts during the first decade of its operation. The use of the European Convention on Human Rights in the Irish courts prior to the enactment of the legislation is discussed, as are the reasons for the passing of the Act. The relationship between the Act and the Irish Constitution is examined, as is the jurisprudence of the Irish courts towards the interpretative obligation found in section 2(1), and the duty placed upon organs of the State by section 3(1). The article ends with a number of observations regarding the impact which the Act has had on the Irish courts at a more general level. Comparisons will be drawn with the uk’s Human Rights Act 1998 throughout the discussion.

2. Burden of proof

2019 ◽  
pp. 10-36
Author(s):  
Maureen Spencer ◽  
John Spencer
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Burden Of Proof ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Detailed Examination ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Presumption Of Innocence ◽  
Human Rights Act ◽  
Human Rights Act 1998 ◽  
The Law ◽  
Civil Cases

This chapter focuses on the burden of proof and presumption of innocence in criminal and civil cases under Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR). It considers the influence of the UK’s Human Rights Act 1998 on the allocation of the burden of proof and compares legal/persuasive burden of proof with the evidential burden. It contains a detailed examination of the case law under this Act and the criteria developed to assess where reverse burdens should apply. It draws on academic commentary in making this analysis. It also looks at situations where the legal and the evidential burden may be split. It concludes with an overview of the law on presumptions.

3. The Human Rights Act 1998 (HRA)

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bernadette Rainey
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Public Authority ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Essential Information ◽  
The Future ◽  
Human Rights Act ◽  
Human Rights Act 1998

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 Human Rights Act 1998 (HRA), which was introduced to allow individuals to argue cases involving rights contained in the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) directly before a UK court. It first explains the background and rationale underlying the HRA, focusing on the arguments for and against a Human Rights Act, as well as the human rights that are covered and not covered by the HRA. The chapter then discusses the judicial powers/duties and remedies under the HRA, along with powers of derogation and reservation, with an emphasis on ECtHR case law, the interpretation clause, and declarations of incompatibility with the Convention rights. In addition, it examines the HRA’s use of proportionality and judicial deference doctrines when deciding whether an act by a public authority is incompatible with a Convention right. The chapter concludes by assessing the future of the HRA.

scholarly journals Old age psychiatry and the law

2002 ◽  
Vol 180 (2) ◽  
pp. 116-119 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robin Jacoby
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Old Age ◽  
Case Law ◽  
European Convention ◽  
The Status ◽  
Human Rights Act ◽  
Old Age Psychiatry ◽  
Human Rights Act 1998 ◽  
Incapacitated Patients ◽  
Do So

BackgroundOld age psychiatry is no less subject to increasing legal and quasi-legal restraint than other branches of the profession, but the emphases are different. Two themes predominate: first, that of capacity or competence; and second, to what extent formal legal measures should be implemented in cases where incapacitated patients do not dissent from, as opposed to giving active consent to, admission to hospital or receiving treatment.AimsTo discuss the issues of capacity or competence, especially in relation to recent legislation and judgements and to proposed legislation in England and Wales.MethodSelective review and discussion of recent case law and current and proposed statute law.Results and conclusionsThe Bournewood case threatened but ultimately failed to upset the status quo. However, the European Convention on Human Rights and the British Human Rights Act 1998 may yet do so.

scholarly journals Non-pecuniary damages before the European Court of Human Rights: Forget the victim; it’s all about the state

2020 ◽  
Vol 33 (2) ◽  
pp. 335-369
Author(s):  
Veronika Fikfak
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Case Law ◽  
The State ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Human Rights Violations ◽  
International Treaty ◽  
European Court ◽  
International Court ◽  
Degrading Treatment ◽  
Individual Justice

AbstractThis article studies how the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR, the Court) adjusts damages for human rights violations. The article empirically analyses 13 years of ECtHR’s case law in relation to Articles 2 (right to life), 3 (torture, inhuman and degrading treatment), and 5 (arbitrary detention) of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR, the Convention). The goal is to understand whether the statements made by the Court about the aims pursued through just satisfaction are confirmed in practice. Through an empirical quantitative study relating to non-pecuniary damages, the article analyses the practice of the Court in awarding non-pecuniary damages for human rights violations and compares it to the competing visions of the ECtHR’s function. In particular, I am interested in determining whether just satisfaction is aimed at redressing the suffering of the victim, her circumstances and vulnerability, or whether the focus is more on the respondent state, its conduct and its past human rights record. The answers to these questions will contribute to the debate whether the ECtHR’s role is one of delivering ‘individual justice’ or whether the Court is – as an international court enforcing an international treaty – focused on the ‘state’.

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.

Republic of Ireland v United Kingdom (1979-80) 2 EHRR 25, European Court of Human Rights

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Thomas E. Webb
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
United Kingdom ◽  
Northern Ireland ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Republic Of Ireland ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
European Court ◽  
Human Rights Act ◽  
Human Rights Act 1998 ◽  
Degrading Treatment

Essential Cases: Public Law provides a bridge between course textbooks and key case judgments. This case document summarizes the facts and decision in Republic of Ireland v United Kingdom (1979-80) 2 EHRR 25, European Court of Human Rights. This case concerned whether interrogation techniques employed by the United Kingdom in Northern Ireland between 1971 and 1975 amounted to torture or inhuman or degrading treatment, contrary to Article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights. More generally, the case note considers the differences between absolute, limited, and qualified rights. The case predates the passage of the Human Rights Act 1998. The document also includes supporting commentary from author Thomas Webb.

3. Sources of English Law

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lucy Jones
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Case Law ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Human Rights Act ◽  
Human Rights Act 1998 ◽  
English Law ◽  
The Uk ◽  
The Eu

This chapter discusses the sources of English law, legislation, custom, case law, and EU law. It includes detail of how an Act of Parliament is created, an explanation of delegated legislation, and how legislation is interpreted by the courts. In considering case law, the importance of judicial precedent and how the system of precedence functions is fully explained. The chapter also discusses the major institutions of the EU including the jurisdiction of the Court of Justice of the European Union. The sources of EU law, treaties, regulations, directives, and decisions are outlined. The chapter discusses the 2016 referendum and the position of EU law in the UK during the negotiation period for the UK’s exit from the EU. Detail is given of the rights protected under the European Convention on Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms and the impact of the Human Rights Act 1998.

7. Human rights in the United Kingdom

2020 ◽  
pp. 255-292
Author(s):  
Steve Wilson ◽  
Helen Rutherford ◽  
Tony Storey ◽  
Natalie Wortley ◽  
Birju Kotecha
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Legal System ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Public Authority ◽  
European Convention ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
European Court ◽  
Domestic Legislation ◽  
Human Rights Act ◽  
Human Rights Act 1998

This chapter considers the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) and its relationship to the English legal system. The focus in the chapter is on key provisions of the Human Rights Act 1998—the Act that incorporated the Convention into UK law. In the earlier part of the chapter there is coverage of sections 2, 3, and 4 of the Act. These provisions concern the duties placed on the courts to take into account judgments of the European Court of Human Rights, to interpret domestic legislation so as to comply with rights under the Convention, and finally to issue a declaration of incompatibility when domestic legislation does not comply with rights under the Convention. Using examples from the case law, the chapter assesses how the courts balance their constitutional role to respect the supremacy of Parliament, with the duties provided in the Act to respect rights under the Convention. There is also an analysis of s.6 of the Human Rights Act 1998 which makes it unlawful for a public authority to act incompatibly with Convention rights. The analysis includes the contested question of what precisely constitutes a ‘public authority’, particularly when a private body is carrying out a public function.

The Retrospective Effect of S. 6 of the Human Rights Act 1998

2002 ◽  
Vol 66 (5) ◽  
pp. 445-457
Author(s):  
Gavin Dingwall
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Burden Of Proof ◽  
Case Law ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Presumption Of Innocence ◽  
Careful Scrutiny ◽  
House Of Lords ◽  
Human Rights Act ◽  
Human Rights Act 1998

When the House of Lords delivered its judgment in Lambert, comment initially concerned the fact that their Lordships held that the legal burden of proof placed on defendants in s. 28 of the Misuse of Drugs Act 1971 contravened the presumption of innocence contained in Article 6(2) of the European Convention on Human Rights. This was indeed a major and potentially far-reaching finding, but it was in fact obiter dicta for the House also held that a defendant who was convicted prior to s. 6 of the Human Rights Act 1998 coming into force could not rely on that section in an appeal after the Act came into force, except in certain carefully prescribed circumstances. It is only now when subsequent case law has challenged this finding that its importance has been fully recognised. This article aims to respond to the academic neglect of this point through a careful scrutiny of the judgments in Lambert and will argue that, despite recent judicial criticism, the majority in Lambert deconstructed a complex statutory framework to expose Parliament's limited intention to ‘bring rights home’.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document