Article 8 (AO1) Flashcards
What is the ao1 plan split into?
-Intro
-Article 8 (Legit aim, Private Life, Family Life, Home, Correspondance)
-Restrictions that apply (Private life, Family life, Home life, Correspondance)
What would you write for the Article 8 intro?
Everyone has the right to a private life, family life, home and correspondence. Article 8 is qualified and can be limited in certain circumstances under Article 8(2).
What is Article 8 section of AO1 made up of?
-Article 8(2)
-Legit aim
-Democratic society
-Private life, Family life, Home, Correspondance
-State justify interference
What would you write for Article 8(2)?
-Article 8(2) gives the three circumstances where the state can interfere with the right to a private life, these are:
-in accordance with the law (Copland v UK)
-Legitimate aim (list all)
-Necessary in democratic society
What are all the legitimate aims?
-National security
-Public safety
-Economic well-being of the country
-For the prevention of disorder or crime
-For the protection of health or morals
-For the protection of the rights and freedoms of others
What would you write for Private life under Article 8 AO1?
-It is defined in (Botta v Italy), it covers physical and psychological integrity, sex life and gender, personal data, reputation, names and photos. (Neimietz v Germany)
What would you write for Family Life under Article 8 AO1?
-The right to enjoy relationships without state interference. This covers and protects lots of types of relationships. Given a wide interpretation and can include a number of relationships as stated in (Marckx v Belgium)
What would you write for Home under Article 8 AO1?
-This covers the right to enjoy your home peacefully without state interference. But the state doesn’t have to provide you with a house, as stated in (Khutan v UK)
What would you write for Correspondance under Article 8 AO1?
-This covers the right to private correspondence, phone calls, letters, emails, texts and other communications. The state can lawfully interfere if it is to protect public safety or freedom of others (Barbulescu v Romania)
What and when would you write for State justify interference in AO1?
At the very end of the Article 8 AO1 section state:
-The state can justify an interference if it is justified by the state with the aim of preventing crime or national security
What would you write for the restriction: family life AO1?
-There is a wide margin of appreciation given to cases involving children
-The courts will consider what’s in the best interests of the child and this can override the parents right to a private life in some instances as stated in, Johannsen v Norway
Which of the restrictions would you write in AO1?
THE ONES THAT APPLY (COULD BE ONE OR TWO)
What would you write for the restriction: Home Life AO1?
-The removal of lawfully parked caravans are a breach of Article 8 as stated in, Connors V UK
-If the land doesn’t belong to the occupant and they do not have consent to reside the police can lawfully remove the traveller and not breach Article 8 as stated in, Price v Leeds City Council
What would you write for the restriction: Correspondance AO1?
-The Investigatory Power Act 2016 gives the police the right to monitor correspondance and take part in surveillance of online activity to protect the public’s safety
-Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2020 allows the state to monitor and intercept private communications
-The police however can’t monitor correspondance for the purpose of phishing
What would you write for the restriction: Private Life AO1?
-Police searches can be a lawful interference with a persons private life if search is proportionate and in interests of national security/crime prevention, if disproprtionate it will breach Article 8 as stated in, Gillan and Quinton v UK
-Medical data is confidential if the person is deemed to be Gillick competent, as stated in the case of Gillick
-Press intrusion into citizen lives only justified if in interests of public and allowed under Article 10. Courts will balance right to privacy against right to publish. Courts consider what is interesting to public and in public interest. (Hannover v Germany principle)
-A persons choice as to sexual orientation is protected under right to a private life. This means any rules of law discriminating against homosexuals are unlawful and interfere with persons right to a private life under Article 8. Goodwin V Uk stated any discrimination against a transgender person is a breach of Article 8.
