• Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

Human Rights.

Extracts from this document...


Human Rights Coursework BIL006 Lord Irvine during the reading of the Human Rights Bill1, stated; "This Bill does not impose any statutory controls on the press by a back-door privacy law... I would not agree with any proposition that the courts as public authorities will be obliged to fashion a law of privacy because of the terms of the Bill" Whilst incorporation will no doubt influence how the courts deal with privacy issues in future, it will be up to the courts whether they use this provision to alter the current disorganised ad hoc protection the law provides. An underlying factor of the Human Rights Act is that public authorities must act in accordance with the same when reaching a decision; this therefore gives the HRA far reaching consequences. As the courts have been little guidance by the act itself, the courts have used their obligation as a public authority to 'give effect' to the convention rights to ensure the individuals privacy rights are protected. This is also in circumstances where the potential defendant is not a public authority itself, therefore ultimately expanding horizontal effect; this is called "indirect horizontal effect". The act implies on the state two duties; not only to refrain from interfering with one's private and family life, but also to take positive steps to protect them. The competing factors in this scenario are the right to privacy (Article 8), if one right actually exists; and the freedom of expression (Article 10), therefore, they need to be discussed jointly and severally. ...read more.


Article 8(1) describes in what circumstances the act can be invoked to protect ones privacy. It could be argued that because the information is in possibly a public place. E.g. a hospital, then the information is already in the public arena, therefore not covered by privacy law. This argument was used by the Daily Mirror, as the Queen attempted to obtain an injunction against the paper to prevent revelations by a footman. It was argued that as Paul Burrell's book had already revealed the information, it was already in the public domain. It was also raised that Article 10 should be invoked to promote freedom of expression. In Z v Finland11, the court made an important observation. 'the protection of...medical data is fundamental importance to a persons enjoyment of his or her respect for private life". This quote was cited in Campbell, and this also raised the point of 'sensitive personal data', which attracts special protection under the Data Protection Act. So that the information, which has been surreptitiously procured, about 'Tony Blair' can be classed as private, it will need to fulfil the criterion as when protected by the law of confidence. In Douglas II, the judge commented, "to the extent that privacy consists of the inclusion only of the invited and the exclusion of all other." This quote surely includes the photographer taking pictures of Tony Blair without his permission or knowledge, as the photographer is not invited, therefore impliedly excluded. ...read more.


Butler-Sloss P stated in Venables: 'The onus of proving the case that freedom of expression must be restricted is firmly upon the applicant seeking relief. The restrictions sought must...be shown to be...justifiable as necessary to satisfy a strong and pressing social need, convincingly demonstrated, to restrain the press...and proportionate to the legitimate aim pursued' It was considered in the 'useful guidance' given by the Council of Europe Resolution 166 5 of 1998. These rights are neither absolute nor in any hierarchical order, since they are of equal value. This does not provide any satisfactory resolution, as no guidance is given to which, if any should take priority. There is a clear public interest for the need to know the state of health of Tony Blair, but an important balancing and possible outweighing factor in this situation is the surrupticious nature of the photographs. As Brooke LJ remarked, 'In the absence of any public interest the court is especially bound to pay particular regard to the PCC and a newspaper which flouts the code may have its claim to freedom of expression trumped by Article 10 (2) considerations of privacy.' Although the clear commercial cynicism of Hello's actions, the judge found that a clear breach of the PCC through the surrupticious photography was such to tip the balance against freedom of expression. As breach of confidence is only remedied by equitable principles16, therefore the judgement given must be made taking into account all circumstances, and if either party has acted bona fida, if not must bare the consequences. ...read more.

The above preview is unformatted text

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our AS and A Level Sources of Law section.

Found what you're looking for?

  • Start learning 29% faster today
  • 150,000+ documents available
  • Just £6.99 a month

Not the one? Search for your essay title...
  • Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

See related essaysSee related essays

Related AS and A Level Sources of Law essays

  1. Discuss whether incorporation of the European Convention on Human Rights into the domestic legislation ...

    Bailey et al state that this "situation respects the traditional doctrine of Parliamentary sovereignty" as it does not give judges the power to get rid of UK legislation only to declare it incompatible.13 There has been a lot of concern surrounding section 10 of the act as it has been

  2. How has the European Court of Human Rights contributed to the protection of children's ...

    5 and 8 - a serious weakness of Court's jurisprudence has been in reconciling parents and children's rights when a child claims right to private life or liberty of person, which encroaches upon parents' family life, or a parent claims right to own family life at expense of child's real interests.

  1. Are the Human Rights Act 1998 and the doctrine of Parliamentary supremacy compatible?

    Convention is not possible, UK law does not become invalid, it continues and is still followed even though incompatible with Europe. As essential as s.3 is, it is also important to note the following Section 4, which sets out the procedure for a 'declaration of incompatibility'.

  2. Law and Justice

    Secondly, there is the issue of avoiding an awkward precedent. The rigid application of rules of precedent can lead to an unjust outcome on some circumstances. The courts have developed ways of avoiding this, for example the House of Lords powers to depart from precedent.

  1. Evaluate the extent to which the Human Right Act 1998 is consistent with the ...

    legislation, past or future, on the ground that it is incompatible with the Convention. The exclusion clause goes to show the importance, which the government attaches to Parliamentary supremacy. Parliamentary sovereignty prevails in that the primary legislation, which unequivocally offends against Convention rights, will live on, subject to remedial measure,

  2. "Public policy has been slow to treat disability as a matter of equality, human ...

    Disabled students can be discriminated against, under section 38(1)(b) if they suffer "less favourable treatment, placing them at a substantial disadvantage" for the purposes of the Act, under Section 28R(1)-(2) Schedule 4C, discrimination in an educational institution can be practiced in terms of in terms of, admissions, exclusions, availability of courses, the terms of admissions and exclusion, can all fall.

  1. The European Convention of Human Rights

    Section 2 states that during court hearings, if a convention right becomes an issue then the court must consider past judgements by The European Court of Human Rights or opinions of The European Commission for Human Rights. Even though judges are not bound by these decisions they may use them as a guideline.

  2. Should people have a right to privacy?

    court room, this is seen as a very serious offence and can lead to a prison sentence. However, regarding legal restrictions on photography, in the United Kingdom one cannot stop photography of private property from a public place. This is supported by the legal case of Max Mosley.

  • Over 160,000 pieces
    of student written work
  • Annotated by
    experienced teachers
  • Ideas and feedback to
    improve your own work