HRA

Question 1

When did the HRA 1998 come into force?

Answer 1

2 Oct 2000

Question 2

Which section gives effect to ECHR rights and freedoms in UK law?

Answer 2

Section 1

Question 3

What Article of the ECHR is omitted by the HRA 1998? Why?

Answer 3

Article 13 the right to a remedy was omitted because satisfactory remedies were already given in s8.

Question 4

What provision say the UK courts should take into account ECtHR case law?

Answer 4

Section 2

Question 5

Which provision says that UK statutes should be interpreted in way that makes them compatible with the ECHR rights ‘as far as possible’?

Answer 5

Section 3

Question 6

If an interpretation of a statutory provision cannot be read compatibly with ECHR rights what recourse do the courts have?

Answer 6

Declaration of incompatibility (s4)

Question 7

Which provision sets out that it is unlawful for public authorities to act incompatibly with ECHR rights?

Answer 7

Section 6

Question 8

What are the defences for public authorities in s6 HRA 1998?

Answer 8

s6(2)(a) allows public authorities to act in accordance with statute that is incompatible with ECHR rights;
s6(2)(b) allows public authorities to enforce statutory provisions that lead them to act incompatibly with ECHR rights.

Question 9

How did HL clarify s2(1) in R (Alconbury Developments) v SS for Environment?

Answer 9

ECHR jurisprudence should be followed where it presents itself clearly and consistently, but it is not binding and if ECtHR judgments contradict constitutional principles or special circumstances warrant it, then the courts may not follow their judgments.

Question 10

In which case did Lord Bingham elucidate the ‘mirror approach’: ‘the duty of national courts is to keep pace with the Strasbourg jurisprudence as it evolves over time: no more, and certainly no less.’

Answer 10

R (Ullah) v Special Adjudicator

Question 11

Which case confirmed ECtHR judgment given in Silih v Slovenia?

Answer 11

Re McCaughey

Question 12

What was the ratio given in Re McCaughey?

Answer 12

There is a retrospective effect for the State to investigate deaths which violate Art 2 even if they occur before the HRA 1998 came into force.

Question 13

What ECtHR judgment given in A v UK did Lord Hoffmann feel bound to apply in SSHD v AF, AM and AN?

Answer 13

The right for alleged terrorists receive evidence against them which was considered ‘closed’ by the State for reasons of national security to ensure that the suspects had a fair trial.

Question 14

In which two cases did the UK courts decline to follow ECtHR judgments?

Answer 14

R v Spear and R v Horncastle

Question 15

What were Lord Steyn’s six points he made with regards to s3 interpretations in R v A (Complainant’s Sexual History)?

Answer 15

1. The court do not need to find ambiguity to apply s3;
2. there is a duty to strive to find a possible interpretation;
3. interpretation may appear linguistically strained;
4. express language may be read down;
5. the court may imply meanings into provisions;
6. declarations of incompatibility are a last resort.

Question 16

Who said that the s3 rule is a ‘rule of interpretation [and] … does not entitle judges to act as legislators’ in R v A (Complainant’s Sexual History)

Answer 16

Lord Hope

Question 17

In which case did Lord Nicholls say that interpretation would only not be possible where ‘a meaning which departs substantially from a fundamental feature of an Act of Parliament’?

Answer 17

Re S (Children) and Re W (Care Orders)

Question 18

What other two reasons, apart from going against a fundamental feature of the legislation, did Lord Nicholls say was a reason not to give an interpretation?

Answer 18

If interpretation might lead to further repercussions or if the decision is one for Parliament.

Question 19

In which case was it not possible to use s3 HRA 1998 due to the repercussions an interpretation would have on other law and the fact that the court was not able to make a political and religious decision?

Answer 19

Bellinger v Bellinger

Question 20

In which case concerning sexual orientation was interpretation possible unlike Bellinger v Bellinger?

Answer 20

Ghaidan v Godin-Mendoza

Question 21

What did Lord Hoffmann say in R (Wilkinson) v IRC about intention of Parliament in his reflection of the judgment given in Ghaidan v Godin-Mendoza?

Answer 21

He said the intention of Parliament was one a reasonable reader would give to a statute reading it in the present eg in this case laws written pre-1998 should still be compatible.

Question 22

What sort of test did the court introduce in Pinnock v Manchester City Council, when the local authority applied for possession of social housing from a tenant?

Answer 22

Proportionality