Article 5
Cases Enactment of the Human Rights Act 1998 - gave people the
possibility to enforce ECHR Convention rights directly in English
Secretary of State for the courts.
Home Department v J J – 18
hour curfew amounted to s6 HRA – creates a mechanism for individuals to enforce their rights
deprivation of liberty against a ‘public authority’. This is an example of vertical effect. It
states that it is unlawful for a public authority to act in a way which
Secretary of State for the is incompatible with the Convention. Public authorities are divided
Home Department v E – 12 into hybrid authorities and core authorities.
hour curfew in own home
and allowed to see family s8 HRA – If found that a public body behaved unlawfully, court can
didn’t amount to deprivation provide remedy such as an injunction or damages
Cheshire West and Council v Article 5 – 1) Everyone has the right to liberty and security of person.
P – P incontinent and ate No one shall be deprived of this liberty save the following cases and
incontinence pads so carers in accordance to with a procedure prescribed by law. The lawful
swept out mouth and placed detention (or arrest) of:
in body suit, restrained the
A – a person after conviction by a competent court,
full time so amounted to
deprivation (Lady Hale’s test B – a person after noncompliance with the lawful order of a court or
“under continuous to secure fulfilment of any obligation prescribed by law,
supervision and unable to
leave?”) C – of a person for the purpose of bringing before a competent legal
authority on reasonable suspicion of having committed an offence
J E v D E – DE kept in care etc,
homes but wanted to live
with JE, deprivation as D – a minor with purpose of educational supervision or bringing them
freedom in home but before a competent legal authority,
wanted to leave and not E – someone in order to prevent the spread of a disease, someone of
allowed unsound mind, alcoholics, drug addicts or vagrants,
Mengesha – unlawful for F – a person to prevent illegal entry into the country.
police to ask for details or
video people ‘kettled’ 2) Everyone arrested promptly informed in a language they
understand the reasons for their arrest and any charge against
Austin – kettling no longer them.
than necessary = no breach
(7 hours in this case) 3)Any arrested should be brought promptly before a judge or any
other officer with judicial power and shall be entitled to trial within
Gillan – stop and search reasonable time or to release pending trial.
under s44 terrorism
prevention act 2000, no 4) Shall be entitled to take proceedings by which lawfulness of
deprivation detention shall be decided speedily by a court and release ordered if
detention isn’t lawful.
Roberts – stop and search
on reasonable suspicion (no 5) Victims shall have right to compensation.
ticket etc) and very short so
no deprivation
Summary
HRA 1998 – Allowed people to take cases of human rights to a UK court for the first time rather
than going to the ECtHR
HRA s6 & s8 – enforce rights against both categories of public authority, called vertical effect.
Hybrid and core public bodies.
Article 5 – freedom of liberty with exceptions. Must be told reasons for arrest and brought
before court promptly. Awarded compensation if a victim and released
Cases Enactment of the Human Rights Act 1998 - gave people the
possibility to enforce ECHR Convention rights directly in English
Secretary of State for the courts.
Home Department v J J – 18
hour curfew amounted to s6 HRA – creates a mechanism for individuals to enforce their rights
deprivation of liberty against a ‘public authority’. This is an example of vertical effect. It
states that it is unlawful for a public authority to act in a way which
Secretary of State for the is incompatible with the Convention. Public authorities are divided
Home Department v E – 12 into hybrid authorities and core authorities.
hour curfew in own home
and allowed to see family s8 HRA – If found that a public body behaved unlawfully, court can
didn’t amount to deprivation provide remedy such as an injunction or damages
Cheshire West and Council v Article 5 – 1) Everyone has the right to liberty and security of person.
P – P incontinent and ate No one shall be deprived of this liberty save the following cases and
incontinence pads so carers in accordance to with a procedure prescribed by law. The lawful
swept out mouth and placed detention (or arrest) of:
in body suit, restrained the
A – a person after conviction by a competent court,
full time so amounted to
deprivation (Lady Hale’s test B – a person after noncompliance with the lawful order of a court or
“under continuous to secure fulfilment of any obligation prescribed by law,
supervision and unable to
leave?”) C – of a person for the purpose of bringing before a competent legal
authority on reasonable suspicion of having committed an offence
J E v D E – DE kept in care etc,
homes but wanted to live
with JE, deprivation as D – a minor with purpose of educational supervision or bringing them
freedom in home but before a competent legal authority,
wanted to leave and not E – someone in order to prevent the spread of a disease, someone of
allowed unsound mind, alcoholics, drug addicts or vagrants,
Mengesha – unlawful for F – a person to prevent illegal entry into the country.
police to ask for details or
video people ‘kettled’ 2) Everyone arrested promptly informed in a language they
understand the reasons for their arrest and any charge against
Austin – kettling no longer them.
than necessary = no breach
(7 hours in this case) 3)Any arrested should be brought promptly before a judge or any
other officer with judicial power and shall be entitled to trial within
Gillan – stop and search reasonable time or to release pending trial.
under s44 terrorism
prevention act 2000, no 4) Shall be entitled to take proceedings by which lawfulness of
deprivation detention shall be decided speedily by a court and release ordered if
detention isn’t lawful.
Roberts – stop and search
on reasonable suspicion (no 5) Victims shall have right to compensation.
ticket etc) and very short so
no deprivation
Summary
HRA 1998 – Allowed people to take cases of human rights to a UK court for the first time rather
than going to the ECtHR
HRA s6 & s8 – enforce rights against both categories of public authority, called vertical effect.
Hybrid and core public bodies.
Article 5 – freedom of liberty with exceptions. Must be told reasons for arrest and brought
before court promptly. Awarded compensation if a victim and released
