Human Rights
Sources: HRA
Common law funeamental rights - R S.2 + significance of Strasbourg jurisrrueence –
(Daly) v Home Secretary, Kennedy v ECtHR = highly persuasive but not binding, -
Informaton Commissioner Prisoners votng rights saga, R(Ullah), Rabone,
ECHR – i.e right to life, fair trial etc. Lester - R(Chester)
Prior to the HRA, the ECtHR’s judgements Prorortonality – a test to see if infringement of
influenced Britsh courts in declaring, as a mater rights is justfiable i.e proportonal to what
of common law, that there are fundamental infringement seeks to achieve - R(Daly), R
consttutonal rights. Courts must have regard to Prisoners Votng Rights Saga – in UK prisoners
ECtHR jurisprudence but are not bound by it. don’t have right to vote. Strasbourg said violaton
HRA (1998) of right to vote/free electons but s.2 only need to
“take into account” and “margin of appreciaton”
– members can interpret how see fit
R(Daly) v HS
Home Secretary's blanket policy
requiring correspondence between a
prisoner and his legal advisers to be
examined in the prisoner's absence was
unlawful
appealed based on Common Law rights
and HRA – both lead to same outcome –
do we need HRA?
Sources: HRA
Common law funeamental rights - R S.2 + significance of Strasbourg jurisrrueence –
(Daly) v Home Secretary, Kennedy v ECtHR = highly persuasive but not binding, -
Informaton Commissioner Prisoners votng rights saga, R(Ullah), Rabone,
ECHR – i.e right to life, fair trial etc. Lester - R(Chester)
Prior to the HRA, the ECtHR’s judgements Prorortonality – a test to see if infringement of
influenced Britsh courts in declaring, as a mater rights is justfiable i.e proportonal to what
of common law, that there are fundamental infringement seeks to achieve - R(Daly), R
consttutonal rights. Courts must have regard to Prisoners Votng Rights Saga – in UK prisoners
ECtHR jurisprudence but are not bound by it. don’t have right to vote. Strasbourg said violaton
HRA (1998) of right to vote/free electons but s.2 only need to
“take into account” and “margin of appreciaton”
– members can interpret how see fit
R(Daly) v HS
Home Secretary's blanket policy
requiring correspondence between a
prisoner and his legal advisers to be
examined in the prisoner's absence was
unlawful
appealed based on Common Law rights
and HRA – both lead to same outcome –
do we need HRA?
