Edited, memorised or added to reading list

on 25-Jul-2016 (Mon)

Do you want BuboFlash to help you learning these things? Click here to log in or create user.

#contract #law #terms
The classification of the terms implied by the SGA 1979 ss 13–15 (but note not s 12) as conditions has been altered as a result of s 15A, which was incorporated into the SGA 1979 by virtue of s 4 of the Sale and Supply of Goods Act 1994.
statusnot read reprioritisations
last reprioritisation on reading queue position [%]
started reading on finished reading on

pdf

cannot see any pdfs




Flashcard 1373306490124

Tags
#human-rights #public
Question
organisations or groups can only bring an action when they are claiming that their rights (as distinct legal persons) have been violated. For instance, a non-governmental organisation (NGO) cannot bring actions on behalf of people whose rights may have been violated by a contracting state. It can only bring an action when it can claim that a state is violating the rights that it enjoys itself as an organisation. Thus in [ case ], the NGO successfully complained that the interception of its communications under the Interception of Communications Act 1985, s 3(2) conferred a virtually unfettered discretion on the Ministry of Defence, which represented a breach of the ECHR, art 8.
Answer
Liberty v UK (2009) 48 EHRR 1

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
on (NGO) cannot bring actions on behalf of people whose rights may have been violated by a contracting state. It can only bring an action when it can claim that a state is violating the rights that it enjoys itself as an organisation. Thus in <span>Liberty v UK (2009) 48 EHRR 1, the NGO successfully complained that the interception of its communications under the Interception of Communications Act 1985, s 3(2) conferred a virtually unfettered discretion on the

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1373308325132

Tags
#human-rights #public
Question
organisations or groups can only bring an action when they are claiming that their rights (as distinct legal persons) have been violated. For instance, a non-governmental organisation (NGO) cannot bring actions on behalf of people whose rights may have been violated by a contracting state. It can only bring an action when [...]. Thus in Liberty v UK (2009) 48 EHRR 1, the NGO successfully complained that the interception of its communications under the Interception of Communications Act 1985, s 3(2) conferred a virtually unfettered discretion on the Ministry of Defence, which represented a breach of the ECHR, art 8.
Answer
it can claim that a state is violating the rights that it enjoys itself as an organisation

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
r rights (as distinct legal persons) have been violated. For instance, a non-governmental organisation (NGO) cannot bring actions on behalf of people whose rights may have been violated by a contracting state. It can only bring an action when <span>it can claim that a state is violating the rights that it enjoys itself as an organisation. Thus in Liberty v UK (2009) 48 EHRR 1, the NGO successfully complained that the interception of its communications under the Interception of Communications Act 1985, s 3(2) conferred a

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1373309373708

Tags
#human-rights #public
Question
the concept of what a 'person' is has raised some difficult issues for the ECtHR. The question of the 'right to life' of the foetus in relation to the ECHR, art 2 has proven almost impossible to resolve, and the court has arguably avoided the issue in order to take account of regional and religious sensitivities relating to abortion: [ case ].
Answer
Vô v France (2005) 40 EHRR 12

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
n of the 'right to life' of the foetus in relation to the ECHR, art 2 has proven almost impossible to resolve, and the court has arguably avoided the issue in order to take account of regional and religious sensitivities relating to abortion: <span>Vô v France (2005) 40 EHRR 12.<span><body><html>

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1373311208716

Tags
#human-rights #public
Question
the concept of what a 'person' is has raised some difficult issues for the ECtHR. The question of the 'right to life' of the foetus in relation to the ECHR, art 2 has proven almost impossible to resolve, and the court has arguably avoided the issue in order to [...]: Vô v France (2005) 40 EHRR 12.
Answer
take account of regional and religious sensitivities relating to abortion

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
t a 'person' is has raised some difficult issues for the ECtHR. The question of the 'right to life' of the foetus in relation to the ECHR, art 2 has proven almost impossible to resolve, and the court has arguably avoided the issue in order to <span>take account of regional and religious sensitivities relating to abortion: Vô v France (2005) 40 EHRR 12.<span><body><html>

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1373312257292

Tags
#human-rights #public
Question
The [ statute ] sets out eight criteria for admissibility. These are largely procedural. The only requirement of any significance is that domestic remedies must be exhausted before an ECHR action can be brought.
Answer
ECHR, art 35

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
The ECHR, art 35 sets out eight criteria for admissibility. These are largely procedural. The only requirement of any significance is that domestic remedies must be exhausted before an ECHR action can be

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1373314092300

Tags
#human-rights #public
Question
The ECHR, art [...] sets out eight criteria for admissibility. These are largely procedural. The only requirement of any significance is that domestic remedies must be exhausted before an ECHR action can be brought.
Answer
35

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
The ECHR, art 35 sets out eight criteria for admissibility. These are largely procedural. The only requirement of any significance is that domestic remedies must be exhausted before an ECHR action can be

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1373315140876

Tags
#human-rights #public
Question
The ECHR, art 35 sets out eight criteria for admissibility. These are largely procedural. The only requirement of any significance is that [...].
Answer
domestic remedies must be exhausted before an ECHR action can be brought

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
The ECHR, art 35 sets out eight criteria for admissibility. These are largely procedural. The only requirement of any significance is that domestic remedies must be exhausted before an ECHR action can be brought.

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1373316189452

Tags
#human-rights #public
Question
In [ case ], the phrase 'threatening the life of the nation' in the ECHR, art 15(1) was interpreted as referring to:

'… an exceptional situation of crisis or emergency which affects the whole population and constitutes a threat to the organised life of the community of which the State is composed.'

Answer
Lawless v Ireland (1979-80) 1 EHRR 15

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
In Lawless v Ireland (1979-80) 1 EHRR 15, the phrase 'threatening the life of the nation' in the ECHR, art 15(1) was interpreted as referring to: '… an exceptional situation of crisis or emergency which affects th

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1373318024460

Tags
#human-rights #public
Question
In Lawless v Ireland (1979-80) 1 EHRR 15, the phrase 'threatening the life of the nation' in the ECHR, art [...] was interpreted as referring to:

'… an exceptional situation of crisis or emergency which affects the whole population and constitutes a threat to the organised life of the community of which the State is composed.'

Answer
15(1)

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
In Lawless v Ireland (1979-80) 1 EHRR 15, the phrase 'threatening the life of the nation' in the ECHR, art 15(1) was interpreted as referring to: '… an exceptional situation of crisis or emergency which affects the whole population and constitutes a threat to the organised life of the

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1373319073036

Tags
#human-rights #public
Question
In Lawless v Ireland (1979-80) 1 EHRR 15, the phrase 'threatening the life of the nation' in the [ statute ] was interpreted as referring to:

'… an exceptional situation of crisis or emergency which affects the whole population and constitutes a threat to the organised life of the community of which the State is composed.'

Answer
ECHR, art 15(1)

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
In Lawless v Ireland (1979-80) 1 EHRR 15, the phrase 'threatening the life of the nation' in the ECHR, art 15(1) was interpreted as referring to: '… an exceptional situation of crisis or emergency which affects the whole population and constitutes a threat to the organised life of the

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1373320908044

Tags
#human-rights #public
Question
In Lawless v Ireland (1979-80) 1 EHRR 15, the phrase 'threatening the life of the nation' in the ECHR, art 15(1) was interpreted as referring to:

'… an [...] which affects the whole population and constitutes a threat to the organised life of the community of which the State is composed.'

Answer
exceptional situation of crisis or emergency

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
In Lawless v Ireland (1979-80) 1 EHRR 15, the phrase 'threatening the life of the nation' in the ECHR, art 15(1) was interpreted as referring to: '… an exceptional situation of crisis or emergency which affects the whole population and constitutes a threat to the organised life of the community of which the State is composed.'

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1373321956620

Tags
#human-rights #public
Question
In Lawless v Ireland (1979-80) 1 EHRR 15, the phrase 'threatening the life of the nation' in the ECHR, art 15(1) was interpreted as referring to:

'… an exceptional situation of crisis or emergency which [...] and constitutes a threat to the organised life of the community of which the State is composed.'

Answer
affects the whole population

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
d><head>In Lawless v Ireland (1979-80) 1 EHRR 15, the phrase 'threatening the life of the nation' in the ECHR, art 15(1) was interpreted as referring to: '… an exceptional situation of crisis or emergency which affects the whole population and constitutes a threat to the organised life of the community of which the State is composed.' <html>

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1373323005196

Tags
#human-rights #public
Question
In Lawless v Ireland (1979-80) 1 EHRR 15, the phrase 'threatening the life of the nation' in the ECHR, art 15(1) was interpreted as referring to:

'… an exceptional situation of crisis or emergency which affects the whole population and [...].'

Answer
constitutes a threat to the organised life of the community of which the State is composed

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
less v Ireland (1979-80) 1 EHRR 15, the phrase 'threatening the life of the nation' in the ECHR, art 15(1) was interpreted as referring to: '… an exceptional situation of crisis or emergency which affects the whole population and <span>constitutes a threat to the organised life of the community of which the State is composed.' <span><body><html>

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1373324053772

Tags
#human-rights #public
Question
In [ case ], the ECtHR said:

'… [I]nherent in the whole of the Convention is a search for a fair balance between the demands of the general interest of the community and the requirements of the protection of the individual's fundamental rights.'

Answer
Soering v UK (1989) 11 EHRR 439

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
In Soering v UK (1989) 11 EHRR 439, the ECtHR said: '… [I]nherent in the whole of the Convention is a search for a fair balance between the demands of the general interest of the community and the requiremen

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1373325888780

Tags
#human-rights #public
Question
In Soering v UK (1989) 11 EHRR 439, the ECtHR said:

'… [I]nherent in the whole of the Convention is a search for [...].'

Answer
a fair balance between the demands of the general interest of the community and the requirements of the protection of the individual's fundamental rights

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
In Soering v UK (1989) 11 EHRR 439, the ECtHR said: '… [I]nherent in the whole of the Convention is a search for a fair balance between the demands of the general interest of the community and the requirements of the protection of the individual's fundamental rights.'

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1373326937356

Tags
#human-rights #public
Question
Certain articles in the ECHR require that interferences made by the state to the relevant rights must be 'prescribed by law' or 'in accordance with the law'. Strasbourg has established an important test for determining this point. First, it must be shown that [...]. The requirement that the respondent state must be able to point toa specific legal rule or regime which authorises its conduct gives the individual protection against arbitrary interferences with relevant rights. Second, as identified by the ECtHR in the Sunday Times v UK (1979-80) 2 EHRR 245 case (discussed in Chapter 12), the identified legal basis must have certain qualities of law. It must be shown that the law is accessible, in that individuals must be able to have an indication that is adequate in the circumstances of the legal rules applicable to a given case. In addition, it must be shown that the legal basis is sufficiently clear. Furthermore, it must be shown that the legal basis is formulated in such a way that a person can foresee, to a degree that is reasonable in the circumstances, the consequences which a given action will entail.
Answer
the interference with the Convention right has some basis in national law

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
in the ECHR require that interferences made by the state to the relevant rights must be 'prescribed by law' or 'in accordance with the law'. Strasbourg has established an important test for determining this point. First, it must be shown that <span>the interference with the Convention right has some basis in national law. The requirement that the respondent state must be able to point toa specific legal rule or regime which authorises its conduct gives the individual protection against arbitrary interfe

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1373327985932

Tags
#human-rights #public
Question
Certain articles in the ECHR require that interferences made by the state to the relevant rights must be 'prescribed by law' or 'in accordance with the law'. Strasbourg has established an important test for determining this point. First, it must be shown that the interference with the Convention right has some basis in national law. The requirement that the respondent state must be able to point toa specific legal rule or regime which authorises its conduct gives the individual protection against arbitrary interferences with relevant rights. Second, as identified by the ECtHR in the [ case ] case (discussed in Chapter 12), the identified legal basis must have certain qualities of law. It must be shown that the law is accessible, in that individuals must be able to have an indication that is adequate in the circumstances of the legal rules applicable to a given case. In addition, it must be shown that the legal basis is sufficiently clear. Furthermore, it must be shown that the legal basis is formulated in such a way that a person can foresee, to a degree that is reasonable in the circumstances, the consequences which a given action will entail.
Answer
Sunday Times v UK (1979-80) 2 EHRR 245

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
ent that the respondent state must be able to point toa specific legal rule or regime which authorises its conduct gives the individual protection against arbitrary interferences with relevant rights. Second, as identified by the ECtHR in the <span>Sunday Times v UK (1979-80) 2 EHRR 245 case (discussed in Chapter 12), the identified legal basis must have certain qualities of law. It must be shown that the law is accessible, in that individuals must be able to have an in

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1373329820940

Tags
#human-rights #public
Question
Certain articles in the ECHR require that interferences made by the state to the relevant rights must be 'prescribed by law' or 'in accordance with the law'. Strasbourg has established an important test for determining this point. First, it must be shown that the interference with the Convention right has some basis in national law. The requirement that the respondent state must be able to point toa specific legal rule or regime which authorises its conduct gives the individual protection against arbitrary interferences with relevant rights. Second, as identified by the ECtHR in the Sunday Times v UK (1979-80) 2 EHRR 245 case (discussed in Chapter 12), the identified legal basis must have certain qualities of law. It must be shown that [...], in that individuals must be able to have an indication that is adequate in the circumstances of the legal rules applicable to a given case. In addition, it must be shown that the legal basis is sufficiently clear. Furthermore, it must be shown that the legal basis is formulated in such a way that a person can foresee, to a degree that is reasonable in the circumstances, the consequences which a given action will entail.
Answer
the law is accessible

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
rbitrary interferences with relevant rights. Second, as identified by the ECtHR in the Sunday Times v UK (1979-80) 2 EHRR 245 case (discussed in Chapter 12), the identified legal basis must have certain qualities of law. It must be shown that <span>the law is accessible, in that individuals must be able to have an indication that is adequate in the circumstances of the legal rules applicable to a given case. In addition, it must be shown that the legal

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1373330869516

Tags
#human-rights #public
Question
Certain articles in the ECHR require that interferences made by the state to the relevant rights must be 'prescribed by law' or 'in accordance with the law'. Strasbourg has established an important test for determining this point. First, it must be shown that the interference with the Convention right has some basis in national law. The requirement that the respondent state must be able to point toa specific legal rule or regime which authorises its conduct gives the individual protection against arbitrary interferences with relevant rights. Second, as identified by the ECtHR in the Sunday Times v UK (1979-80) 2 EHRR 245 case (discussed in Chapter 12), the identified legal basis must have certain qualities of law. It must be shown that the law is accessible, in that individuals must be able to have an indication that is adequate in the circumstances of the legal rules applicable to a given case. In addition, it must be shown that the legal basis is [...]. Furthermore, it must be shown that the legal basis is formulated in such a way that a person can foresee, to a degree that is reasonable in the circumstances, the consequences which a given action will entail.
Answer
sufficiently clear

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
aw. It must be shown that the law is accessible, in that individuals must be able to have an indication that is adequate in the circumstances of the legal rules applicable to a given case. In addition, it must be shown that the legal basis is <span>sufficiently clear. Furthermore, it must be shown that the legal basis is formulated in such a way that a person can foresee, to a degree that is reasonable in the circumstances, the consequences which a

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1373331918092

Tags
#human-rights #public
Question
Certain articles in the ECHR require that interferences made by the state to the relevant rights must be 'prescribed by law' or 'in accordance with the law'. Strasbourg has established an important test for determining this point. First, it must be shown that the interference with the Convention right has some basis in national law. The requirement that the respondent state must be able to point toa specific legal rule or regime which authorises its conduct gives the individual protection against arbitrary interferences with relevant rights. Second, as identified by the ECtHR in the Sunday Times v UK (1979-80) 2 EHRR 245 case (discussed in Chapter 12), the identified legal basis must have certain qualities of law. It must be shown that the law is accessible, in that individuals must be able to have an indication that is adequate in the circumstances of the legal rules applicable to a given case. In addition, it must be shown that the legal basis is sufficiently clear. Furthermore, it must be shown that the legal basis is [...].
Answer
formulated in such a way that a person can foresee, to a degree that is reasonable in the circumstances, the consequences which a given action will entail

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
be able to have an indication that is adequate in the circumstances of the legal rules applicable to a given case. In addition, it must be shown that the legal basis is sufficiently clear. Furthermore, it must be shown that the legal basis is <span>formulated in such a way that a person can foresee, to a degree that is reasonable in the circumstances, the consequences which a given action will entail.<span><body><html>

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1373332966668

Tags
#human-rights #public
Question
The applicants were brought before a magistrates' court, where they were bound over to keep the peace following their disruption of a fox hunt. Here, the binding over orders were not imposed as a sanction for past unlawful conduct, and it could not therefore be said that what the applicants were being bound over not to do would have been apparent to them. The Strasbourg court therefore held that there had been a breach of the ECHR, art 10, on the basis that the interference had not been prescribed by law.
Answer
Hashman and Harrup v UK (2000) 30 EHRR 241

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
Conversely, in Hashman and Harrup v UK (2000) 30 EHRR 241, the applicants were brought before a magistrates' court, where they were bound over to keep the peace following their disruption of a fox hunt. Here, the binding over orders were not i

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1373334801676

Tags
#human-rights #public
Question
Hashman and Harrup v UK (2000) 30 EHRR 241
Answer
The applicants were brought before a magistrates' court, where they were bound over to keep the peace following their disruption of a fox hunt. Here, the binding over orders were not imposed as a sanction for past unlawful conduct, and it could not therefore be said that what the applicants were being bound over not to do would have been apparent to them. The Strasbourg court therefore held that there had been a breach of the ECHR, art 10, on the basis that the interference had not been prescribed by law.

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
Conversely, in Hashman and Harrup v UK (2000) 30 EHRR 241, the applicants were brought before a magistrates' court, where they were bound over to keep the peace following their disruption of a fox hunt. Here, the binding over orders were not i

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1373336636684

Tags
#human-rights #public
Question
Conversely, in Hashman and Harrup v UK (2000) 30 EHRR 241, the applicants were brought before a magistrates' court, where they were bound over to keep the peace following their disruption of a fox hunt. Here, [...]. The Strasbourg court therefore held that there had been a breach of the ECHR, art 10, on the basis that the interference had not been prescribed by law.
Answer
the binding over orders were not imposed as a sanction for past unlawful conduct, and it could not therefore be said that what the applicants were being bound over not to do would have been apparent to them

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
ml>Conversely, in Hashman and Harrup v UK (2000) 30 EHRR 241, the applicants were brought before a magistrates' court, where they were bound over to keep the peace following their disruption of a fox hunt. Here, the binding over orders were not imposed as a sanction for past unlawful conduct, and it could not therefore be said that what the applicants were being bound over not to do would have been apparent to them. The Strasbourg court therefore held that there had been a breach of the ECHR, art 10, on the basis that the interference had not been prescribed by law.<html>

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1373337685260

Tags
#human-rights #public
Question
Conversely, in Hashman and Harrup v UK (2000) 30 EHRR 241, the applicants were brought before a magistrates' court, where they were bound over to keep the peace following their disruption of a fox hunt. Here, the binding over orders were not imposed as a sanction for past unlawful conduct, and it could not therefore be said that what the applicants were being bound over not to do would have been apparent to them. The Strasbourg court therefore held that there had been a breach of the ECHR, art 10, on the basis that [...].
Answer
the interference had not been prescribed by law

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
ful conduct, and it could not therefore be said that what the applicants were being bound over not to do would have been apparent to them. The Strasbourg court therefore held that there had been a breach of the ECHR, art 10, on the basis that <span>the interference had not been prescribed by law.<span><body><html>

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1373338733836

Tags
#human-rights #public
Question
under the [ statute ]: ‘any person, non-governmental organisation or group of individuals claiming to be a victim of a violation' of a Convention right by a contracting state may bring an application against that state before the ECtHR. Note that under the terms of the ECHR, art 1, there is no requirement of citizenship of a signatory state; the test is whether the person is within the jurisdiction of the state. For example, an American tourist in the UK could be a victim under the Convention.
Answer
ECHR, art 34

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
under the ECHR, art 34: ‘any person, non-governmental organisation or group of individuals claiming to be a victim of a violation' of a Convention right by a contracting state may bring an application against

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1373340568844

Tags
#human-rights #public
Question
under the ECHR, art 34: ‘any person, non-governmental organisation or group of individuals [...]' of a Convention right by a contracting state may bring an application against that state before the ECtHR. Note that under the terms of the ECHR, art 1, there is no requirement of citizenship of a signatory state; the test is whether the person is within the jurisdiction of the state. For example, an American tourist in the UK could be a victim under the Convention.
Answer
claiming to be a victim of a violation

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
under the ECHR, art 34: ‘any person, non-governmental organisation or group of individuals claiming to be a victim of a violation' of a Convention right by a contracting state may bring an application against that state before the ECtHR. Note that under the terms of the ECHR, art 1, there is no requirement of citi

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1373341617420

Tags
#human-rights #public
Question
under the ECHR, art 34: ‘[...] claiming to be a victim of a violation' of a Convention right by a contracting state may bring an application against that state before the ECtHR. Note that under the terms of the ECHR, art 1, there is no requirement of citizenship of a signatory state; the test is whether the person is within the jurisdiction of the state. For example, an American tourist in the UK could be a victim under the Convention.
Answer
any person, non-governmental organisation or group of individuals

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
under the ECHR, art 34: ‘any person, non-governmental organisation or group of individuals claiming to be a victim of a violation' of a Convention right by a contracting state may bring an application against that state before the ECtHR. Note that under the terms of the ECHR,

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1373342665996

Tags
#human-rights #public
Question
under the ECHR, art 34: ‘any person, non-governmental organisation or group of individuals claiming to be a victim of a violation' of a Convention right by a contracting state may bring an application against that state before the ECtHR. Note that under the terms of the [ statute ], there is no requirement of citizenship of a signatory state; the test is whether the person is within the jurisdiction of the state. For example, an American tourist in the UK could be a victim under the Convention.
Answer
ECHR, art 1

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
person, non-governmental organisation or group of individuals claiming to be a victim of a violation' of a Convention right by a contracting state may bring an application against that state before the ECtHR. Note that under the terms of the <span>ECHR, art 1, there is no requirement of citizenship of a signatory state; the test is whether the person is within the jurisdiction of the state. For example, an American tourist in the UK could be

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1373344501004

Tags
#human-rights #public
Question
Exceptionally, a person can make a claim for acts that have occurred outside the geographical jurisdiction of a contracting state. In [ case ], which concerned the bombing of Belgrade by NATO forces, the Grand Chamber of the ECtHR observed that, while the ECHR, art 1 reflects an essentially territorial notion of jurisdiction, extra-territorial jurisdiction could be recognised in some very limited circumstances.
Answer
Bankovic v Belgium (2001) 11 BHRC 435

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
Exceptionally, a person can make a claim for acts that have occurred outside the geographical jurisdiction of a contracting state. In Bankovic v Belgium (2001) 11 BHRC 435, which concerned the bombing of Belgrade by NATO forces, the Grand Chamber of the ECtHR observed that, while the ECHR, art 1 reflects an essentially territorial notion of jurisdiction,

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1373346336012

Tags
#human-rights #public
Question
Exceptionally, a person can make a claim for [...]. In Bankovic v Belgium (2001) 11 BHRC 435, which concerned the bombing of Belgrade by NATO forces, the Grand Chamber of the ECtHR observed that, while the ECHR, art 1 reflects an essentially territorial notion of jurisdiction, extra-territorial jurisdiction could be recognised in some very limited circumstances.
Answer
acts that have occurred outside the geographical jurisdiction of a contracting state

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
Exceptionally, a person can make a claim for acts that have occurred outside the geographical jurisdiction of a contracting state. In Bankovic v Belgium (2001) 11 BHRC 435, which concerned the bombing of Belgrade by NATO forces, the Grand Chamber of the ECtHR observed that, while the ECHR, art 1 reflects an essent

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1373347384588

Tags
#human-rights #public
Question
Before the ECtHR in [ case ], however, the scope of jurisdiction was widened quite significantly when the Grand Chamber determined that jurisdiction under the ECHR, art 1 (and a subsequent violation of the ECHR, art 2) also applied in respect of the other five deaths. The court was satisfied that, in the special circumstances which applied in Iraq in 2003–4, when the UK and USA were effectively occupying powers with responsibility for security, the extent of control and power exercised by the UK military was sufficient to render the actions of its armed forces subject to regulation under the ECHR, whether on or off base.
Answer
Al-Skeini and Others v UK [2011] ECHR 55721/07

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
Before the ECtHR in Al-Skeini and Others v UK [2011] ECHR 55721/07, however, the scope of jurisdiction was widened quite significantly when the Grand Chamber determined that jurisdiction under the ECHR, art 1 (and a subsequent violation of the ECHR, ar

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1373349219596

Tags
#human-rights #public
Question
Before the ECtHR in Al-Skeini and Others v UK [2011] ECHR 55721/07, however, the scope of jurisdiction was widened quite significantly when the Grand Chamber determined that jurisdiction under the ECHR, art 1 (and a subsequent violation of the ECHR, art 2) also applied in respect of the other five deaths. The court was satisfied that, in the special circumstances which applied in Iraq in 2003–4, when the UK and USA were effectively occupying powers with responsibility for security, the [...] was sufficient to render the actions of its armed forces subject to regulation under the ECHR, whether on or off base.
Answer
extent of control and power exercised by the UK military

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
, art 2) also applied in respect of the other five deaths. The court was satisfied that, in the special circumstances which applied in Iraq in 2003–4, when the UK and USA were effectively occupying powers with responsibility for security, the <span>extent of control and power exercised by the UK military was sufficient to render the actions of its armed forces subject to regulation under the ECHR, whether on or off base.<span><body><html>

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1373350268172

Tags
#human-rights #public
Question
Before the ECtHR in Al-Skeini and Others v UK [2011] ECHR 55721/07, however, the scope of jurisdiction was widened quite significantly when the Grand Chamber determined that jurisdiction under the ECHR, art 1 (and a subsequent violation of the ECHR, art 2) also applied in respect of the other five deaths. The court was satisfied that, in the special circumstances which applied in Iraq in 2003–4, when the UK and USA were effectively occupying powers with responsibility for security, the extent of control and power exercised by the UK military was [...].
Answer
sufficient to render the actions of its armed forces subject to regulation under the ECHR, whether on or off base

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
e court was satisfied that, in the special circumstances which applied in Iraq in 2003–4, when the UK and USA were effectively occupying powers with responsibility for security, the extent of control and power exercised by the UK military was <span>sufficient to render the actions of its armed forces subject to regulation under the ECHR, whether on or off base.<span><body><html>

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1373351316748

Tags
#human-rights #public
Question
In the conjoined appeals of [ case ], however, the Supreme Court unanimously decided that the so-called 'Snatch Land Rover claims', similarly relating to the deaths of British servicemen operating in the field of combat in Iraq (in 2005 and 2006), did attract the protection of the Convention. Lord Hope believed that Strasbourg had partly redefined the concept of jurisdiction from the position taken in the Bankovic case to a recognition in Al-Skeini v UK that the key element was the degree of control and authority exercised by the relevant state over the individual. When considering the way in which the armed forces operate, he held that serviceman relinquish almost total control over their lives to the state. Accordingly, deaths of servicemen in the battlefield fall within the jurisdiction of the ECHR, art 1, regardless of whether they are operating in areas not under the control of the contracting state.
Answer
Smith, Ellis and Allbutt v Ministry of Defence [2013] UKSC 41

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
In the conjoined appeals of Smith, Ellis and Allbutt v Ministry of Defence [2013] UKSC 41, however, the Supreme Court unanimously decided that the so-called 'Snatch Land Rover claims', similarly relating to the deaths of British servicemen operating in the field of combat in

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1373353151756

Tags
#human-rights #public
Question
In the conjoined appeals of Smith, Ellis and Allbutt v Ministry of Defence [2013] UKSC 41, however, the Supreme Court unanimously decided that the so-called 'Snatch Land Rover claims', similarly relating to the deaths of British servicemen operating in the field of combat in Iraq (in 2005 and 2006), did attract the protection of the Convention. Lord Hope believed that Strasbourg had partly redefined the concept of jurisdiction from the position taken in the Bankovic case to a recognition in Al-Skeini v UK that the key element was [...]. When considering the way in which the armed forces operate, he held that serviceman relinquish almost total control over their lives to the state. Accordingly, deaths of servicemen in the battlefield fall within the jurisdiction of the ECHR, art 1, regardless of whether they are operating in areas not under the control of the contracting state.
Answer
the degree of control and authority exercised by the relevant state over the individual

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
2006), did attract the protection of the Convention. Lord Hope believed that Strasbourg had partly redefined the concept of jurisdiction from the position taken in the Bankovic case to a recognition in Al-Skeini v UK that the key element was <span>the degree of control and authority exercised by the relevant state over the individual. When considering the way in which the armed forces operate, he held that serviceman relinquish almost total control over their lives to the state. Accordingly, deaths of servicemen in

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1373354200332

Tags
#human-rights #public
Question
In the conjoined appeals of Smith, Ellis and Allbutt v Ministry of Defence [2013] UKSC 41, however, the Supreme Court unanimously decided that the so-called 'Snatch Land Rover claims', similarly relating to the deaths of British servicemen operating in the field of combat in Iraq (in 2005 and 2006), did attract the protection of the Convention. Lord Hope believed that Strasbourg had partly redefined the concept of jurisdiction from the position taken in the Bankovic case to a recognition in Al-Skeini v UK that the key element was the degree of control and authority exercised by the relevant state over the individual. When considering the way in which the armed forces operate, he held that serviceman relinquish almost total control over their lives to the state. Accordingly, [...].
Answer
deaths of servicemen in the battlefield fall within the jurisdiction of the ECHR, art 1, regardless of whether they are operating in areas not under the control of the contracting state

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
gree of control and authority exercised by the relevant state over the individual. When considering the way in which the armed forces operate, he held that serviceman relinquish almost total control over their lives to the state. Accordingly, <span>deaths of servicemen in the battlefield fall within the jurisdiction of the ECHR, art 1, regardless of whether they are operating in areas not under the control of the contracting state.<span><body><html>

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1373355248908

Tags
#human-rights #public
Question
As far as standing is concerned, applicants must show that [...] in order to be a 'victim' for the purposes of the ECHR, art 34: Klass v Germany (1978) 2 EHRR 214.
Answer
they are directly affected by state action or inaction

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
As far as standing is concerned, applicants must show that they are directly affected by state action or inaction in order to be a 'victim' for the purposes of the ECHR, art 34: Klass v Germany (1978) 2 EHRR 214.

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1373356297484

Tags
#human-rights #public
Question
As far as standing is concerned, applicants must show that they are directly affected by state action or inaction in order to be a 'victim' for the purposes of the ECHR, art 34: [ case ].
Answer
Klass v Germany (1978) 2 EHRR 214

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
As far as standing is concerned, applicants must show that they are directly affected by state action or inaction in order to be a 'victim' for the purposes of the ECHR, art 34: Klass v Germany (1978) 2 EHRR 214.

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1373358132492

Tags
#human-rights #public
Question
Applicants must be a 'person' in the legal sense and therefore can be natural or legal persons, such as corporate bodies (e.g. [ case ]) and certain other organisations with legal personality, including trade unions and political parties.
Answer
The Sunday Times v UK (1979)

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
Applicants must be a 'person' in the legal sense and therefore can be natural or legal persons, such as corporate bodies (e.g. The Sunday Times v UK (1979)) and certain other organisations with legal personality, including trade unions and political parties.

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1373359967500

Tags
#human-rights #public
Question
An applicant may, however, be an indirect victim of a violation in exceptional circumstances, for instance [...].
Answer
close relatives of a deceased where complainants allege a violation of the right to life

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
An applicant may, however, be an indirect victim of a violation in exceptional circumstances, for instance close relatives of a deceased where complainants allege a violation of the right to life.

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1373361016076

Tags
#human-rights #public
Question
[ case ], where the lack of a specific criminal sanction in Dutch law allowed a man to evade conviction for the sexual assault of a girl with learning difficulties. The respondent state was held to have breached its positive obligation under the ECHR, art 8.
Answer
X and Y v The Netherlands [1985] ECHR 4

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
X and Y v The Netherlands [1985] ECHR 4, where the lack of a specific criminal sanction in Dutch law allowed a man to evade conviction for the sexual assault of a girl with learning difficulties. The respondent state was held

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1373362851084

Tags
#human-rights #public
Question
X and Y v The Netherlands [1985] ECHR 4, where the lack of a specific criminal sanction in Dutch law allowed a man to evade conviction for the sexual assault of a girl with learning difficulties. The respondent state was held [...].
Answer
to have breached its positive obligation under the ECHR, art 8

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
body>X and Y v The Netherlands [1985] ECHR 4, where the lack of a specific criminal sanction in Dutch law allowed a man to evade conviction for the sexual assault of a girl with learning difficulties. The respondent state was held to have breached its positive obligation under the ECHR, art 8.<body><html>

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1373363899660

Tags
#human-rights #public
Question
In [ case ] it was held that the positive obligation on the state was for its authorities (in this case the police) to take preventative measures to protect an individual whose life was at risk from the criminal acts of another private individual. However, the court stated that this obligation on the authorities was subject to the following conditions:

'[I]t must be established … that the authorities knew or ought to have known at the time of the existence of a real and immediate risk to the life of an identified individual or individuals from the criminal acts of a third party and that they failed to take measures within the scope of their powers which, judged reasonably, might have been expected to avoid that risk.'

The court also acknowledged, in view of the operational choices that must be made in terms of priorities and resources, that the positive obligation must be interpreted in a way which does not impose an excessive burden on states and public authorities.
Answer
Osman v UK, (2000) 29 EHRR 245

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
In Osman v UK, (2000) 29 EHRR 245 it was held that the positive obligation on the state was for its authorities (in this case the police) to take preventative measures to protect an individual whose life was at risk from

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1373365734668

Tags
#human-rights #public
Question
In Osman v UK, (2000) 29 EHRR 245 it was held that the positive obligation on the state was for its authorities (in this case the police) to take preventative measures to protect an individual whose life was at risk from the criminal acts of another private individual. However, the court stated that this obligation on the authorities was subject to the following conditions:

'[I]t must be established … that the authorities [...] of the existence of a real and immediate risk to the life of an identified individual or individuals from the criminal acts of a third party and that they failed to take measures within the scope of their powers which, judged reasonably, might have been expected to avoid that risk.'

The court also acknowledged, in view of the operational choices that must be made in terms of priorities and resources, that the positive obligation must be interpreted in a way which does not impose an excessive burden on states and public authorities.
Answer
knew or ought to have known at the time

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
se life was at risk from the criminal acts of another private individual. However, the court stated that this obligation on the authorities was subject to the following conditions: '[I]t must be established … that the authorities <span>knew or ought to have known at the time of the existence of a real and immediate risk to the life of an identified individual or individuals from the criminal acts of a third party and that they failed to take measures within

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1373366783244

Tags
#human-rights #public
Question
In Osman v UK, (2000) 29 EHRR 245 it was held that the positive obligation on the state was for its authorities (in this case the police) to take preventative measures to protect an individual whose life was at risk from the criminal acts of another private individual. However, the court stated that this obligation on the authorities was subject to the following conditions:

'[I]t must be established … that the authorities knew or ought to have known at the time of [...] of an identified individual or individuals from the criminal acts of a third party and that they failed to take measures within the scope of their powers which, judged reasonably, might have been expected to avoid that risk.'

The court also acknowledged, in view of the operational choices that must be made in terms of priorities and resources, that the positive obligation must be interpreted in a way which does not impose an excessive burden on states and public authorities.
Answer
the existence of a real and immediate risk to the life

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
of another private individual. However, the court stated that this obligation on the authorities was subject to the following conditions: '[I]t must be established … that the authorities knew or ought to have known at the time of <span>the existence of a real and immediate risk to the life of an identified individual or individuals from the criminal acts of a third party and that they failed to take measures within the scope of their powers which, judged reasonably, might

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1373367831820

Tags
#human-rights #public
Question
In Osman v UK, (2000) 29 EHRR 245 it was held that the positive obligation on the state was for its authorities (in this case the police) to take preventative measures to protect an individual whose life was at risk from the criminal acts of another private individual. However, the court stated that this obligation on the authorities was subject to the following conditions:

'[I]t must be established … that the authorities knew or ought to have known at the time of the existence of a real and immediate risk to the life of [...] from the criminal acts of a third party and that they failed to take measures within the scope of their powers which, judged reasonably, might have been expected to avoid that risk.'

The court also acknowledged, in view of the operational choices that must be made in terms of priorities and resources, that the positive obligation must be interpreted in a way which does not impose an excessive burden on states and public authorities.
Answer
an identified individual or individuals

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
hat this obligation on the authorities was subject to the following conditions: '[I]t must be established … that the authorities knew or ought to have known at the time of the existence of a real and immediate risk to the life of <span>an identified individual or individuals from the criminal acts of a third party and that they failed to take measures within the scope of their powers which, judged reasonably, might have been expected to avoid that risk.' &#1

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1373368880396

Tags
#human-rights #public
Question
In Osman v UK, (2000) 29 EHRR 245 it was held that the positive obligation on the state was for its authorities (in this case the police) to take preventative measures to protect an individual whose life was at risk from the criminal acts of another private individual. However, the court stated that this obligation on the authorities was subject to the following conditions:

'[I]t must be established … that the authorities knew or ought to have known at the time of the existence of a real and immediate risk to the life of an identified individual or individuals from [...] and that they failed to take measures within the scope of their powers which, judged reasonably, might have been expected to avoid that risk.'

The court also acknowledged, in view of the operational choices that must be made in terms of priorities and resources, that the positive obligation must be interpreted in a way which does not impose an excessive burden on states and public authorities.
Answer
the criminal acts of a third party

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
bject to the following conditions: '[I]t must be established … that the authorities knew or ought to have known at the time of the existence of a real and immediate risk to the life of an identified individual or individuals from <span>the criminal acts of a third party and that they failed to take measures within the scope of their powers which, judged reasonably, might have been expected to avoid that risk.' The court also acknowledged, i

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1373369928972

Tags
#human-rights #public
Question
In Osman v UK, (2000) 29 EHRR 245 it was held that the positive obligation on the state was for its authorities (in this case the police) to take preventative measures to protect an individual whose life was at risk from the criminal acts of another private individual. However, the court stated that this obligation on the authorities was subject to the following conditions:

'[I]t must be established … that the authorities knew or ought to have known at the time of the existence of a real and immediate risk to the life of an identified individual or individuals from the criminal acts of a third party and that [...].'

The court also acknowledged, in view of the operational choices that must be made in terms of priorities and resources, that the positive obligation must be interpreted in a way which does not impose an excessive burden on states and public authorities.
Answer
they failed to take measures within the scope of their powers which, judged reasonably, might have been expected to avoid that risk

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
3; '[I]t must be established … that the authorities knew or ought to have known at the time of the existence of a real and immediate risk to the life of an identified individual or individuals from the criminal acts of a third party and that <span>they failed to take measures within the scope of their powers which, judged reasonably, might have been expected to avoid that risk.' The court also acknowledged, in view of the operational choices that must be made in terms of priorities and resources, that the positive obligation must be interpreted i

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1373370977548

Tags
#human-rights #public
Question
The UK has a reservation to the ECHR, art 2 of the First Protocol to the Convention (the 'right to education'). Note that, as with derogations, the ECtHR will not always passively accept a reservation. In [ case ], the ECtHR removed (or 'severed') elements from a 'declaration' made by the Swiss government that the government claimed amounted to a reservation. This was held to be so vague as to amount to a 'reservation of a general character' (prohibited by the ECHR, art 57).
Answer
Belilos v Switzerland (1988) 10 EHRR 466

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
The UK has a reservation to the ECHR, art 2 of the First Protocol to the Convention (the 'right to education'). Note that, as with derogations, the ECtHR will not always passively accept a reservation. In Belilos v Switzerland (1988) 10 EHRR 466, the ECtHR removed (or 'severed') elements from a 'declaration' made by the Swiss government that the government claimed amounted to a reservation. This was held to be so vague as to am

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1373372812556

Tags
#human-rights #public
Question
The UK has a reservation to the ECHR, art 2 of the First Protocol to the Convention (the 'right to education'). Note that, as with derogations, the ECtHR will not always passively accept a reservation. In Belilos v Switzerland (1988) 10 EHRR 466, the ECtHR removed (or 'severed') elements from a 'declaration' made by the Swiss government that the government claimed amounted to a reservation. This was held to be [...] (prohibited by the ECHR, art 57).
Answer
so vague as to amount to a 'reservation of a general character'

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
assively accept a reservation. In Belilos v Switzerland (1988) 10 EHRR 466, the ECtHR removed (or 'severed') elements from a 'declaration' made by the Swiss government that the government claimed amounted to a reservation. This was held to be <span>so vague as to amount to a 'reservation of a general character' (prohibited by the ECHR, art 57).<span><body><html>

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1373373861132

Tags
#human-rights #public
Question
The UK has a reservation to the ECHR, art 2 of the First Protocol to the Convention (the 'right to education'). Note that, as with derogations, the ECtHR will not always passively accept a reservation. In Belilos v Switzerland (1988) 10 EHRR 466, the ECtHR removed (or 'severed') elements from a 'declaration' made by the Swiss government that the government claimed amounted to a reservation. This was held to be so vague as to amount to a 'reservation of a general character' (prohibited by the [ statute ]).
Answer
ECHR, art 57

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
HR removed (or 'severed') elements from a 'declaration' made by the Swiss government that the government claimed amounted to a reservation. This was held to be so vague as to amount to a 'reservation of a general character' (prohibited by the <span>ECHR, art 57).<span><body><html>

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1373375696140

Tags
#human-rights #public
Question
Where a particularly important facet of an individual's existence or identity is in issue, the ECtHR will be less likely to accept that a contracting state should be afforded a broad discretion. In areas of morality, the scope of the margin is likely to be wider, as there is no uniform conception of morality among the contracting states. Similarly, a state is allowed considerable discretion in cases of [...] arising under the ECHR, art 15, and cases involving national security. A further area where a wide margin is given is in respect of measures which require an appreciation of social, economic, and environmental policies, which the national authorities are seen as best placed to assess.
Answer
public emergency

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
be afforded a broad discretion. In areas of morality, the scope of the margin is likely to be wider, as there is no uniform conception of morality among the contracting states. Similarly, a state is allowed considerable discretion in cases of <span>public emergency arising under the ECHR, art 15, and cases involving national security. A further area where a wide margin is given is in respect of measures which require an appreciation of social, econ

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1373376744716

Tags
#human-rights #public
Question
Where a particularly important facet of an individual's existence or identity is in issue, the ECtHR will be less likely to accept that a contracting state should be afforded a broad discretion. In areas of morality, the scope of the margin is likely to be wider, as there is no uniform conception of morality among the contracting states. Similarly, a state is allowed considerable discretion in cases of public emergency arising under the [ statute ], and cases involving national security. A further area where a wide margin is given is in respect of measures which require an appreciation of social, economic, and environmental policies, which the national authorities are seen as best placed to assess.
Answer
ECHR, art 15

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
areas of morality, the scope of the margin is likely to be wider, as there is no uniform conception of morality among the contracting states. Similarly, a state is allowed considerable discretion in cases of public emergency arising under the <span>ECHR, art 15, and cases involving national security. A further area where a wide margin is given is in respect of measures which require an appreciation of social, economic, and environmental polici

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1373378579724

Tags
#human-rights #public
Question
Where a particularly important facet of an individual's existence or identity is in issue, the ECtHR will be less likely to accept that a contracting state should be afforded a broad discretion. In areas of morality, the scope of the margin is likely to be wider, as there is no uniform conception of morality among the contracting states. Similarly, a state is allowed considerable discretion in cases of public emergency arising under the ECHR, art 15, and cases [...]. A further area where a wide margin is given is in respect of measures which require an appreciation of social, economic, and environmental policies, which the national authorities are seen as best placed to assess.
Answer
involving national security

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
cope of the margin is likely to be wider, as there is no uniform conception of morality among the contracting states. Similarly, a state is allowed considerable discretion in cases of public emergency arising under the ECHR, art 15, and cases <span>involving national security. A further area where a wide margin is given is in respect of measures which require an appreciation of social, economic, and environmental policies, which the national authorities are

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1373379628300

Tags
#human-rights #public
Question
Where a particularly important facet of an individual's existence or identity is in issue, the ECtHR will be less likely to accept that a contracting state should be afforded a broad discretion. In areas of morality, the scope of the margin is likely to be wider, as there is no uniform conception of morality among the contracting states. Similarly, a state is allowed considerable discretion in cases of public emergency arising under the ECHR, art 15, and cases involving national security. A further area where a wide margin is given is in respect of measures which require [...], which the national authorities are seen as best placed to assess.
Answer
an appreciation of social, economic, and environmental policies

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
tes. Similarly, a state is allowed considerable discretion in cases of public emergency arising under the ECHR, art 15, and cases involving national security. A further area where a wide margin is given is in respect of measures which require <span>an appreciation of social, economic, and environmental policies, which the national authorities are seen as best placed to assess.<span><body><html>

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1373380676876

Tags
#human-rights #public
Question
The ECHR, arts 8–11 are qualified Convention rights, and require that any restrictions made to these rights must be 'necessary in a democratic society'. In [ case ], Strasbourg held that interferences will be considered necessary in a democratic society if they answer a pressing social need and are proportionate to the legitimate aim pursued.
Answer
Handyside v UK (1976) 1 EHRR 737

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
The ECHR, arts 8–11 are qualified Convention rights, and require that any restrictions made to these rights must be 'necessary in a democratic society'. In Handyside v UK (1976) 1 EHRR 737, Strasbourg held that interferences will be considered necessary in a democratic society if they answer a pressing social need and are proportionate to the legitimate aim pursued.

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1373382511884

Tags
#human-rights #public
Question
The ECHR, arts 8–11 are qualified Convention rights, and require that any restrictions made to these rights must be '[...]'. In Handyside v UK (1976) 1 EHRR 737, Strasbourg held that interferences will be considered necessary in a democratic society if they answer a pressing social need and are proportionate to the legitimate aim pursued.
Answer
necessary in a democratic society

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
The ECHR, arts 8–11 are qualified Convention rights, and require that any restrictions made to these rights must be 'necessary in a democratic society'. In Handyside v UK (1976) 1 EHRR 737, Strasbourg held that interferences will be considered necessary in a democratic society if they answer a pressing social need and are proportionat

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1373383560460

Tags
#human-rights #public
Question
The ECHR, arts 8–11 are qualified Convention rights, and require that any restrictions made to these rights must be 'necessary in a democratic society'. In Handyside v UK (1976) 1 EHRR 737, Strasbourg held that [...].
Answer
interferences will be considered necessary in a democratic society if they answer a pressing social need and are proportionate to the legitimate aim pursued

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
>The ECHR, arts 8–11 are qualified Convention rights, and require that any restrictions made to these rights must be 'necessary in a democratic society'. In Handyside v UK (1976) 1 EHRR 737, Strasbourg held that interferences will be considered necessary in a democratic society if they answer a pressing social need and are proportionate to the legitimate aim pursued.<html>

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1373384609036

Tags
#human-rights #public
Question
One variation of the proportionality test involves [...]. Another variation of the test involves considering whether there was an alternative and less intrusive means of achieving the legitimate aim without interfering with the guaranteed right to the same degree.
Answer
balancing the severity of the interference to the Convention right against the legitimate aim for which the interference was made

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
One variation of the proportionality test involves balancing the severity of the interference to the Convention right against the legitimate aim for which the interference was made. Another variation of the test involves considering whether there was an alternative and less intrusive means of achieving the legitimate aim without interfering with the guaranteed rig

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1373385657612

Tags
#human-rights #public
Question
One variation of the proportionality test involves balancing the severity of the interference to the Convention right against the legitimate aim for which the interference was made. Another variation of the test involves considering whether there was [...].
Answer
an alternative and less intrusive means of achieving the legitimate aim without interfering with the guaranteed right to the same degree

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
ation of the proportionality test involves balancing the severity of the interference to the Convention right against the legitimate aim for which the interference was made. Another variation of the test involves considering whether there was <span>an alternative and less intrusive means of achieving the legitimate aim without interfering with the guaranteed right to the same degree.<span><body><html>

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1373386706188

Tags
#human-rights #public
Question
Strasbourg declared in [ case ] that:

'For domestic law to meet these requirements [in Sunday Times] it must afford a measure of legal protection against arbitrary interferences by public authorities with the rights safeguarded by the Convention. In matters affecting fundamental rights it would be contrary to the rule of law, one of the basic principles of a democratic society enshrined in the Convention, for a legal discretion granted to the executive to be expressed in terms of an unfettered power. Consequently, the law must indicate with sufficient clarity the scope of any such discretion conferred on the competent authorities and the manner of its exercise.'

Answer
Gillan and Quinton v UK (2010) 50 EHRR 45

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
Strasbourg declared in Gillan and Quinton v UK (2010) 50 EHRR 45 that: 'For domestic law to meet these requirements [in Sunday Times] it must afford a measure of legal protection against arbitrary interferences by public authorities with

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1373388541196

Tags
#human-rights #public
Question
Strasbourg declared in Gillan and Quinton v UK (2010) 50 EHRR 45 that:

'For domestic law to meet these requirements [in Sunday Times] it must afford a measure of legal protection against arbitrary interferences by public authorities with the rights safeguarded by the Convention. In matters affecting fundamental rights it would be contrary to the rule of law, one of the basic principles of a democratic society enshrined in the Convention, for a legal discretion granted to the executive to be expressed in terms of an unfettered power. Consequently, the law must indicate [...] conferred on the competent authorities and the manner of its exercise.'

Answer
with sufficient clarity the scope of any such discretion

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
contrary to the rule of law, one of the basic principles of a democratic society enshrined in the Convention, for a legal discretion granted to the executive to be expressed in terms of an unfettered power. Consequently, the law must indicate <span>with sufficient clarity the scope of any such discretion conferred on the competent authorities and the manner of its exercise.' <span><body><html>

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1373389589772

Tags
#human-rights #public
Question
Under the [ statute ], any contracting state may bring an application before the ECtHR against another contracting state.
Answer
ECHR, art 33

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
Under the ECHR, art 33, any contracting state may bring an application before the ECtHR against another contracting state.

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1373391424780

Tags
#human-rights #public
Question
A number of important cases have arisen as a result of UK military involvement in Iraq since 2003. In R (on application of Al-Skeini and Others) v Secretary of State for Defence [2007] UKHL 26, the applicants were relatives of six Iraqi civilians who, it was claimed, had been killed by UK armed forces in Basra during 2003. The House of Lords decided at this point that the ECHR would extend to human rights abuses that occur outside the territorial jurisdiction of the United Kingdom in very limited situations. Their Lordships decided that the claims relating to five of the Iraqi civilians, who were all killed in the course of general security operations, could not succeed because [...]. However, the sixth Iraqi citizen, Baha Mousa, came within the jurisdiction of the UK under the ECHR, art 1, as he died as a result of injuries inflicted by UK armed forces personnel inside a detention unit controlled by British forces.
Answer
the UK did not exercise sufficient control over Iraq at the relevant time

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
torial jurisdiction of the United Kingdom in very limited situations. Their Lordships decided that the claims relating to five of the Iraqi civilians, who were all killed in the course of general security operations, could not succeed because <span>the UK did not exercise sufficient control over Iraq at the relevant time. However, the sixth Iraqi citizen, Baha Mousa, came within the jurisdiction of the UK under the ECHR, art 1, as he died as a result of injuries inflicted by UK armed forces personnel in

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1373392473356

Tags
#human-rights #public
Question
A number of important cases have arisen as a result of UK military involvement in Iraq since 2003. In R (on application of Al-Skeini and Others) v Secretary of State for Defence [2007] UKHL 26, the applicants were relatives of six Iraqi civilians who, it was claimed, had been killed by UK armed forces in Basra during 2003. The House of Lords decided at this point that the ECHR would extend to human rights abuses that occur outside the territorial jurisdiction of the United Kingdom in very limited situations. Their Lordships decided that the claims relating to five of the Iraqi civilians, who were all killed in the course of general security operations, could not succeed because the UK did not exercise sufficient control over Iraq at the relevant time. However, the sixth Iraqi citizen, Baha Mousa, came within the jurisdiction of the UK under the ECHR, art 1, as [...].
Answer
he died as a result of injuries inflicted by UK armed forces personnel inside a detention unit controlled by British forces

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
f general security operations, could not succeed because the UK did not exercise sufficient control over Iraq at the relevant time. However, the sixth Iraqi citizen, Baha Mousa, came within the jurisdiction of the UK under the ECHR, art 1, as <span>he died as a result of injuries inflicted by UK armed forces personnel inside a detention unit controlled by British forces.<span><body><html>

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1373393521932

Tags
#human-rights #public
Question
The position until recently with regard to rights enjoyed by UK armed forces personnel was more restrictive. The case of [ case ] concerned Private Jason Smith, a Territorial Army soldier, who died of heatstroke while serving in Iraq in 2003. The issue was whether the ECHR applies extra- territorially to protect British troops abroad, specifically when operating in areas not under UK control. If jurisdiction could be established under the ECHR, art 1, the next issue was whether his next of kin could establish a claim in respect of his rights under the ECHR, art 2 against the Ministry of Defence. The majority in the Supreme Court held that the jurisdiction of the ECHR did not extend to protection of Jason Smith's rights under the ECHR, art 2, as he had died as a result of conditions in the field where he was operating in an area seen to be outside UK control.
Answer
R (on application of Smith) v Secretary of State for Defence [2010] UKSC 29

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
The position until recently with regard to rights enjoyed by UK armed forces personnel was more restrictive. The case of R (on application of Smith) v Secretary of State for Defence [2010] UKSC 29 concerned Private Jason Smith, a Territorial Army soldier, who died of heatstroke while serving in Iraq in 2003. The issue was whether the ECHR applies extra- territorially to protect Br

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1373395356940

Tags
#human-rights #public
Question
The position until recently with regard to rights enjoyed by UK armed forces personnel was more restrictive. The case of R (on application of Smith) v Secretary of State for Defence [2010] UKSC 29 concerned Private Jason Smith, a Territorial Army soldier, who died of heatstroke while serving in Iraq in 2003. The issue was whether the ECHR applies extra- territorially to protect British troops abroad, specifically when operating in areas not under UK control. If jurisdiction could be established under the ECHR, art 1, the next issue was whether his next of kin could establish a claim in respect of his rights under the ECHR, art 2 against the Ministry of Defence. The majority in the Supreme Court held that [...].
Answer
the jurisdiction of the ECHR did not extend to protection of Jason Smith's rights under the ECHR, art 2, as he had died as a result of conditions in the field where he was operating in an area seen to be outside UK control

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
diction could be established under the ECHR, art 1, the next issue was whether his next of kin could establish a claim in respect of his rights under the ECHR, art 2 against the Ministry of Defence. The majority in the Supreme Court held that <span>the jurisdiction of the ECHR did not extend to protection of Jason Smith's rights under the ECHR, art 2, as he had died as a result of conditions in the field where he was operating in an area seen to be outside UK control.<span><body><html>

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1373396405516

Tags
#human-rights #public
Question
One way in which positive obligations can be fulfilled is by contracting states being required to enact laws in their domestic legal systems that prohibit, deter, and punish individuals who commit such violations. An example of this is provided by [ case ]
Answer
X and Y v The Netherlands

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
ay in which positive obligations can be fulfilled is by contracting states being required to enact laws in their domestic legal systems that prohibit, deter, and punish individuals who commit such violations. An example of this is provided by <span>X and Y v The Netherlands<span><body><html>

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1373398240524

Tags
#human-rights #public
Question
According to the [ statute ], no derogation is allowed with respect to the ECHR, arts 2 (except regarding deaths resulting from lawful acts of war), 3, 4(1) and 7.
Answer
ECHR, art 15(2)

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
According to the ECHR, art 15(2), no derogation is allowed with respect to the ECHR, arts 2 (except regarding deaths resulting from lawful acts of war), 3, 4(1) and 7.

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1373400075532

Tags
#human-rights #public
Question
The [ statute ] allows contracting states to take measures that would interfere temporarily with the rights and freedoms protected by the ECHR and Protocols where:
(a) there is a 'public emergency threatening the life of the nation';
(b) the measure is strictly required by the exigencies of the situation;
(c) the measure is consistent with any other obligations under international law; and
(d) there has been timely written notification to the Secretary-General of the Council of Europe.
Answer
ECHR, art 15

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
The ECHR, art 15 allows contracting states to take measures that would interfere temporarily with the rights and freedoms protected by the ECHR and Protocols where: (a) there is a 'public emergency

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1373401910540

Tags
#human-rights #public
Question
The ECHR, art 15 allows contracting states to take measures that would interfere temporarily with the rights and freedoms protected by the ECHR and Protocols where:
Answer
(a) there is a 'public emergency threatening the life of the nation';
(b) the measure is strictly required by the exigencies of the situation;
(c) the measure is consistent with any other obligations under international law; and
(d) there has been timely written notification to the Secretary-General of the Council of Europe.

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
The ECHR, art 15 allows contracting states to take measures that would interfere temporarily with the rights and freedoms protected by the ECHR and Protocols where: (a) there is a 'public emergency threatening the life of the nation'; (b) the measure is strictly required by the exigencies of the situation; (c) the measure is consistent wit

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1373403745548

Tags
#human-rights #public
Question
In [ case ], the House of Lords quashed the derogation order (and entered a section 4 declaration of incompatibility in respect of the Anti- Terrorism, Crime and Security Act 2001, ss 21–23), on the ground that the derogation measures were not 'strictly required by the exigencies of the situation'.
Answer
A and Others v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2004] UKHL 56

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
In A and Others v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2004] UKHL 56, the House of Lords quashed the derogation order (and entered a section 4 declaration of incompatibility in respect of the Anti- Terrorism, Crime and Security Act 2001, ss 21–23), on th

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1373405580556

Tags
#human-rights #public
Question
In A and Others v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2004] UKHL 56, the House of Lords quashed the derogation order (and entered a section 4 declaration of incompatibility in respect of the Anti- Terrorism, Crime and Security Act 2001, ss 21–23), on the ground that [...].
Answer
the derogation measures were not 'strictly required by the exigencies of the situation'

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
tate for the Home Department [2004] UKHL 56, the House of Lords quashed the derogation order (and entered a section 4 declaration of incompatibility in respect of the Anti- Terrorism, Crime and Security Act 2001, ss 21–23), on the ground that <span>the derogation measures were not 'strictly required by the exigencies of the situation'.<span><body><html>

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1373406629132

Tags
#human-rights #public
Question
Reservations are made under the [ statute ]. Any contracting state may, at the time of signing or ratifying the ECHR, make its acceptance subject to a condition, which limits or varies the application of the ECHR to that state.
Answer
ECHR, art 57

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
Reservations are made under the ECHR, art 57. Any contracting state may, at the time of signing or ratifying the ECHR, make its acceptance subject to a condition, which limits or varies the application of the ECHR to that state.</

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1373408464140

Tags
#human-rights #public
Question
The ECtHR has taken the view that [...]. This empowers it to determine the exact nature and content of a given state's acceptance of its jurisdiction. A similar result occurred in Loizidou v Turkey (Preliminary Objections), (1995) 20 EHRR 99, the chief objection being that the purported 'reservation' would defeat the very object and purpose of the Convention.
Answer
it alone has responsibility for deciding what is or is not a reservation

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
The ECtHR has taken the view that it alone has responsibility for deciding what is or is not a reservation. This empowers it to determine the exact nature and content of a given state's acceptance of its jurisdiction. A similar result occurred in Loizidou v Turkey (Preliminary Objections), (

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1373409512716

Tags
#human-rights #public
Question
The ECtHR has taken the view that it alone has responsibility for deciding what is or is not a reservation. This empowers it to determine the exact nature and content of a given state's acceptance of its jurisdiction. A similar result occurred in [ case ], the chief objection being that the purported 'reservation' would defeat the very object and purpose of the Convention.
Answer
Loizidou v Turkey (Preliminary Objections), (1995) 20 EHRR 99

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
ECtHR has taken the view that it alone has responsibility for deciding what is or is not a reservation. This empowers it to determine the exact nature and content of a given state's acceptance of its jurisdiction. A similar result occurred in <span>Loizidou v Turkey (Preliminary Objections), (1995) 20 EHRR 99, the chief objection being that the purported 'reservation' would defeat the very object and purpose of the Convention.<span><body><html>

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1373411347724

Tags
#human-rights #public
Question
In [ case ], concerning an interference with freedom of expression under the ECHR, art 10(1) the ECtHR explained, on the basis that this was necessary for the 'protection of morals', that:

'By reason of their direct and continuous contact with the vital forces of their countries, State authorities are in principle in a better position than the international judge to give an opinion on the exact content of those requirements [of morality] as well as on the "necessity" of a "restriction" or "penalty" intended to meet them … Nevertheless, Article 10(2) does not give the Contracting States an unlimited power of appreciation. The court, which, with the Commission, is responsible for ensuring the observance of those States' engagements, is empowered to give the final ruling on whether a "restriction" or "penalty" is reconcilable with freedom of expression as protected by Article 10. The domestic margin of appreciation thus goes hand in hand with a European supervision.'

Answer
Handyside v UK (1976) 1 EHRR 737

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
In Handyside v UK (1976) 1 EHRR 737, concerning an interference with freedom of expression under the ECHR, art 10(1) the ECtHR explained, on the basis that this was necessary for the 'protection of morals', that: &#

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1373413182732

Tags
#human-rights #public
Question
In Silver v UK (1983) 5 EHRR 347, Strasbourg added that [...], as the principle of the rule of law implied that interference by the authorities with an individual's rights should be subject to effective control.
Answer
the legal basis must provide safeguards against abuse

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
In Silver v UK (1983) 5 EHRR 347, Strasbourg added that the legal basis must provide safeguards against abuse, as the principle of the rule of law implied that interference by the authorities with an individual's rights should be subject to effective control.

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1373414231308

Tags
#human-rights #public
Question
In [ statute ], Strasbourg added that the legal basis must provide safeguards against abuse, as the principle of the rule of law implied that interference by the authorities with an individual's rights should be subject to effective control.
Answer
Silver v UK (1983) 5 EHRR 347

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
In Silver v UK (1983) 5 EHRR 347, Strasbourg added that the legal basis must provide safeguards against abuse, as the principle of the rule of law implied that interference by the authorities with an individual's right

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1373416066316

Tags
#human-rights #public
Question
An example of prescription by law is provided by [ case ], where Strasbourg had to consider whether the imposition of a requirement to be 'bound over to keep the peace' on those charged with, and convicted of, breaches of the peace was sufficiently clear. The court held that, despite it being couched in vague and general terms, the law was sufficiently clear and foreseeable on the basis that the sanction had been set after a finding that a person had committed a breach of the peace. In these particular circumstances it was sufficiently clear that those 'bound over' were agreeing to refrain from causing further, similar breaches of the law in future.
Answer
Steel and Morris v UK (2000) 28 EHRR 603

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
An example of prescription by law is provided by Steel and Morris v UK (2000) 28 EHRR 603, where Strasbourg had to consider whether the imposition of a requirement to be 'bound over to keep the peace' on those charged with, and convicted of, breaches of the peace was suffici

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1373417901324

Tags
#human-rights #public
Question
An example of prescription by law is provided by Steel and Morris v UK (2000) 28 EHRR 603, where Strasbourg had to consider whether the imposition of a requirement to be 'bound over to keep the peace' on those charged with, and convicted of, breaches of the peace was sufficiently clear. The court held that, [...] on the basis that the sanction had been set after a finding that a person had committed a breach of the peace. In these particular circumstances it was sufficiently clear that those 'bound over' were agreeing to refrain from causing further, similar breaches of the law in future.
Answer
despite it being couched in vague and general terms, the law was sufficiently clear and foreseeable

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
v UK (2000) 28 EHRR 603, where Strasbourg had to consider whether the imposition of a requirement to be 'bound over to keep the peace' on those charged with, and convicted of, breaches of the peace was sufficiently clear. The court held that, <span>despite it being couched in vague and general terms, the law was sufficiently clear and foreseeable on the basis that the sanction had been set after a finding that a person had committed a breach of the peace. In these particular circumstances it was sufficiently clear that those 'bou

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1373418949900

Tags
#human-rights #public
Question
An example of prescription by law is provided by Steel and Morris v UK (2000) 28 EHRR 603, where Strasbourg had to consider whether the imposition of a requirement to be 'bound over to keep the peace' on those charged with, and convicted of, breaches of the peace was sufficiently clear. The court held that, despite it being couched in vague and general terms, the law was sufficiently clear and foreseeable on the basis that [...]. In these particular circumstances it was sufficiently clear that those 'bound over' were agreeing to refrain from causing further, similar breaches of the law in future.
Answer
the sanction had been set after a finding that a person had committed a breach of the peace

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
keep the peace' on those charged with, and convicted of, breaches of the peace was sufficiently clear. The court held that, despite it being couched in vague and general terms, the law was sufficiently clear and foreseeable on the basis that <span>the sanction had been set after a finding that a person had committed a breach of the peace. In these particular circumstances it was sufficiently clear that those 'bound over' were agreeing to refrain from causing further, similar breaches of the law in future.<span><

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1373422882060

Tags
#human-rights #public
Question
Generally, for the state to lawfully interfere with a qualified Convention right, it must be shown that all three of the following circumstances apply.
Answer
(a) The interference was prescribed by, or in accordance with, the law.
(b) The interference was in pursuit of a legitimate aim.
(c) The interference was necessary in a democratic society.

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
Generally, for the state to lawfully interfere with a qualified Convention right, it must be shown that all three of the following circumstances apply. (a) The interference was prescribed by, or in accordance with, the law. (b) The interference was in pursuit of a legitimate aim. (c) The interference was necessary in a democra

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1373444902156

Tags
#hra #law #public
Question
In the leading case of Aston Cantlow and Wilmcote with Billesley Parochial Church Council v Wallbank, [2003] UKHL 37 the House of Lords gave some guidance on what constituted the scope of a core public authority. Lord Nicholls (para 7) suggested that the phrase 'public authority' in the HRA 1998, s 1 is 'essentially a reference to a body whose nature is governmental in a broad sense'. His Lordship further suggested that the following factors could be considered relevant in determining whether a body is a 'core' public authority:
Answer

(a) the possession of special powers;
(b) democratic accountability;
(c) public funding in whole or in part;
(d) an obligation to act only in the public interest;
(e) a statutory constitution

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
In the leading case of Aston Cantlow and Wilmcote with Billesley Parochial Church Council v Wallbank, [2003] UKHL 37 the House of Lords gave some guidance on what constituted the scope of a core public authority. Lord Nicholls (para 7) suggested that the phrase 'public authority' in the HRA 1998, s 1 is 'essentially a reference to a body whose nature is governmental in a broad sense'. His Lordship further suggested that the following factors could be considered relevant in determining whether a body is a 'core' public authority: (a) the possession of special powers; (b) democratic accountability; (c) public funding in whole or in part; (d) an obligation to act only in the public interest; (e)

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1373446737164

Tags
#hra #law #public
Question
Whereas 'core' public authorities are potentially bound by the ECHR in respect of all their actions, 'hybrid' public authorities are only bound by the ECHR in respect of [...].
Answer
those functions they carry out which are of a public nature

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
Whereas 'core' public authorities are potentially bound by the ECHR in respect of all their actions, 'hybrid' public authorities are only bound by the ECHR in respect of those functions they carry out which are of a public nature.

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1373447785740

Tags
#hra #law #public
Question
The HRA 1998, s 8(1) provides that, where a court or tribunal finds that an act of a public authority is unlawful, contrary to the HRA 1998, s 6(1), it may grant such remedy as it considers 'just and appropriate'. The power to award a remedy is, however, limited in a number of respects (see the [ statute ]). In practice, the nature of the remedy will vary greatly according to the context of the case. The normal remedies will include damages, declarations, injunctions, and the prerogative orders.
Answer
HRA 1998, s 8(1)– (4)

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
ibunal finds that an act of a public authority is unlawful, contrary to the HRA 1998, s 6(1), it may grant such remedy as it considers 'just and appropriate'. The power to award a remedy is, however, limited in a number of respects (see the <span>HRA 1998, s 8(1)– (4)). In practice, the nature of the remedy will vary greatly according to the context of the case. The normal remedies will include damages, declarations, injunctions, and the prerogativ

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1373450669324

Tags
#hra #law #public
Question
Legislation must be read and given effect, so far as is possible, in a way that is compatible with ECHR rights: [ statute ].
Answer
HRA 1998, s 3

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
Legislation must be read and given effect, so far as is possible, in a way that is compatible with ECHR rights: HRA 1998, s 3.

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1373452504332

Tags
#hra #law #public
Question
Legislation must be read and given effect, so far as is possible, in a way that is compatible with ECHR rights: HRA 1998, s 3. If this is not possible, the court can [...]: HRA 1998, s 4.
Answer
make a declaration of incompatibility

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
Legislation must be read and given effect, so far as is possible, in a way that is compatible with ECHR rights: HRA 1998, s 3. If this is not possible, the court can make a declaration of incompatibility: HRA 1998, s 4.

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1373453552908

Tags
#hra #law #public
Question
Legislation must be read and given effect, so far as is possible, in a way that is compatible with ECHR rights: HRA 1998, s 3. If this is not possible, the court can make a declaration of incompatibility: [ statute ].
Answer
HRA 1998, s 4

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
html>Legislation must be read and given effect, so far as is possible, in a way that is compatible with ECHR rights: HRA 1998, s 3. If this is not possible, the court can make a declaration of incompatibility: HRA 1998, s 4.<html>

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1373455387916

Tags
#hra #law #public
Question
[ case ] was the first decision in which the House of Lords declined to follow the jurisprudence of the ECtHR.
Answer
R v Spear [2002] UKHL 31

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
R v Spear [2002] UKHL 31 was the first decision in which the House of Lords declined to follow the jurisprudence of the ECtHR.

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1373457222924

Tags
#hra #law #public
Question
In determining legal questions, including common law development, the courts must [...]: HRA 1998, s 2.
Answer
take into account relevant ECHR case law

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
In determining legal questions, including common law development, the courts must take into account relevant ECHR case law: HRA 1998, s 2.

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1373458271500

Tags
#hra #law #public
Question
In determining legal questions, including common law development, the courts must take into account relevant ECHR case law: [ statute ].
Answer
HRA 1998, s 2

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
In determining legal questions, including common law development, the courts must take into account relevant ECHR case law: HRA 1998, s 2.

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1373460106508

Tags
#hra #law #public
Question
It is important to note that, where the unlawful interference with a Convention right has been provided for by statute and the court is unable to interpret the offending piece of legislation compatibly with the Convention right and makes a declaration of incompatibility instead, [...].
Answer
the public authority will not be found to have acted unlawfully

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
unlawful interference with a Convention right has been provided for by statute and the court is unable to interpret the offending piece of legislation compatibly with the Convention right and makes a declaration of incompatibility instead, <span>the public authority will not be found to have acted unlawfully.<span><body><html>

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1373462203660

Tags
#hra #law #public
Question
The [ statute ] gives effect to ECHR rights and freedoms in UK domestic law.
Answer
HRA 1998, s 1

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
The HRA 1998, s 1 gives effect to ECHR rights and freedoms in UK domestic law.

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1373464038668

Tags
#hra #law #public
Question
The HRA 1998, s 1 [...].
Answer
gives effect to ECHR rights and freedoms in UK domestic law

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
The HRA 1998, s 1 gives effect to ECHR rights and freedoms in UK domestic law.

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1373465087244

Tags
#hra #law #public
Question
The [ statute ] provides that UK courts and tribunals have an obligation to take Strasbourg case law ‘into account’ when determining questions that arise in connection with an ECHR right.
Answer
HRA 1998, s 2(1)

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
The HRA 1998, s 2(1) provides that UK courts and tribunals have an obligation to take Strasbourg case law ‘into account’ when determining questions that arise in connection with an ECHR right.

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1373466922252

Tags
#hra #law #public
Question
The HRA 1998, s 2(1) provides that [...].
Answer
UK courts and tribunals have an obligation to take Strasbourg case law ‘into account’ when determining questions that arise in connection with an ECHR right

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
The HRA 1998, s 2(1) provides that UK courts and tribunals have an obligation to take Strasbourg case law ‘into account’ when determining questions that arise in connection with an ECHR right.

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1373467970828

Tags
#hra #law #public
Question
The [ statute ] provides that:

'[S]o far as it is possible to do so, primary and subordinate legislation must be read and given effect in a way which is compatible with Convention rights.'

Answer
HRA 1998, s 3(1)

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
The HRA 1998, s 3(1) provides that: '[S]o far as it is possible to do so, primary and subordinate legislation must be read and given effect in a way which is compatible with Convention rights.'

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1373469805836

Tags
#hra #law #public
Question
The HRA 1998, s 3(1) provides that:

'[S]o far as it is possible to do so, primary and subordinate legislation must [...].'

Answer
be read and given effect in a way which is compatible with Convention rights

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
The HRA 1998, s 3(1) provides that: '[S]o far as it is possible to do so, primary and subordinate legislation must be read and given effect in a way which is compatible with Convention rights.'

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1373470854412

Tags
#hra #law #public
Question
The approach to be taken under the HRA towards the interpretation of legislation has been controversial, as can be seen in R v A (Complainant's Sexual History) (No 2) [2001] 2 WLR 1546. The Youth Justice and Criminal Evidence Act 1999, s 41 was designed to restrict the circumstances in which evidence and questioning about a complainant's prior sexual history in trials concerning sexual offences could be permitted. The issue was whether this new provision prejudiced the defendant's right to a fair trial under the ECHR, art 6.

The House of Lords held that the Youth Justice and Criminal Evidence Act 1999, s 41 was incompatible with the right to a fair trial. As a consequence of this finding, their Lordships went on to consider their obligations under the HRA 1998, s 3. Lord Steyn, in particular, advocated a '[...] under the HRA 1998, s 3. He reasoned:

'[T]he interpretative obligation under section 3 of the 1998 Act is a strong one. It applies even if there is no ambiguity in the language in the sense of the language being capable of two different meanings … Parliament specifically rejected the legislative model of requiring a reasonable interpretation. Section 3 places a duty on the court to strive to find a possible interpretation compatible with Convention rights … In accordance with the will of Parliament as reflected in section 3 it will sometimes be necessary to adopt an interpretation which linguistically may appear strained. The techniques to be used will not only involve the reading down of express language in a statute but also the implication of provisions. A declaration of incompatibility is a measure of last resort. It must be avoided unless it is plainly impossible to do so. If a clear limitation on Convention rights is stated in terms, such an impossibility will arise.'

Answer
wide' approach to interpretation

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
ice and Criminal Evidence Act 1999, s 41 was incompatible with the right to a fair trial. As a consequence of this finding, their Lordships went on to consider their obligations under the HRA 1998, s 3. Lord Steyn, in particular, advocated a '<span>wide' approach to interpretation under the HRA 1998, s 3. He reasoned: '[T]he interpretative obligation under section 3 of the 1998 Act is a strong one. It applies even if there is no ambiguity in the langu

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1373471902988

Tags
#hra #law #public
Question
The approach to be taken under the HRA towards the interpretation of legislation has been controversial, as can be seen in R v A (Complainant's Sexual History) (No 2) [2001] 2 WLR 1546. The Youth Justice and Criminal Evidence Act 1999, s 41 was designed to restrict the circumstances in which evidence and questioning about a complainant's prior sexual history in trials concerning sexual offences could be permitted. The issue was whether this new provision prejudiced the defendant's right to a fair trial under the ECHR, art 6.

The House of Lords held that the Youth Justice and Criminal Evidence Act 1999, s 41 was incompatible with the right to a fair trial. As a consequence of this finding, their Lordships went on to consider their obligations under the HRA 1998, s 3. Lord Steyn, in particular, advocated a 'wide' approach to interpretation under the HRA 1998, s 3. He reasoned:

'[T]he interpretative obligation under section 3 of the 1998 Act is a strong one. It applies even [...] … Parliament specifically rejected the legislative model of requiring a reasonable interpretation. Section 3 places a duty on the court to strive to find a possible interpretation compatible with Convention rights … In accordance with the will of Parliament as reflected in section 3 it will sometimes be necessary to adopt an interpretation which linguistically may appear strained. The techniques to be used will not only involve the reading down of express language in a statute but also the implication of provisions. A declaration of incompatibility is a measure of last resort. It must be avoided unless it is plainly impossible to do so. If a clear limitation on Convention rights is stated in terms, such an impossibility will arise.'

Answer
if there is no ambiguity in the language in the sense of the language being capable of two different meanings

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
r the HRA 1998, s 3. Lord Steyn, in particular, advocated a 'wide' approach to interpretation under the HRA 1998, s 3. He reasoned: '[T]he interpretative obligation under section 3 of the 1998 Act is a strong one. It applies even <span>if there is no ambiguity in the language in the sense of the language being capable of two different meanings … Parliament specifically rejected the legislative model of requiring a reasonable interpretation. Section 3 places a duty on the court to strive to find a possible interpretation compat

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1373472951564

Tags
#hra #law #public
Question
[T]he interpretative obligation under section 3 of the 1998 Act is a strong one. It applies even if there is no ambiguity in the language in the sense of the language being capable of two different meanings
Answer
R v A (Complainant's Sexual History) (No 2) [2001] 2 WLR 1546

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
ial. As a consequence of this finding, their Lordships went on to consider their obligations under the HRA 1998, s 3. Lord Steyn, in particular, advocated a 'wide' approach to interpretation under the HRA 1998, s 3. He reasoned: '<span>[T]he interpretative obligation under section 3 of the 1998 Act is a strong one. It applies even if there is no ambiguity in the language in the sense of the language being capable of two different meanings … Parliament specifically rejected the legislative model of requiring a reasonable interpretation. Section 3 places a duty on the court to strive to find a possible interpretation compat

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1373474786572

Tags
#hra #law #public
Question
The approach to be taken under the HRA towards the interpretation of legislation has been controversial, as can be seen in R v A (Complainant's Sexual History) (No 2) [2001] 2 WLR 1546. The Youth Justice and Criminal Evidence Act 1999, s 41 was designed to restrict the circumstances in which evidence and questioning about a complainant's prior sexual history in trials concerning sexual offences could be permitted. The issue was whether this new provision prejudiced the defendant's right to a fair trial under the ECHR, art 6.

The House of Lords held that the Youth Justice and Criminal Evidence Act 1999, s 41 was incompatible with the right to a fair trial. As a consequence of this finding, their Lordships went on to consider their obligations under the HRA 1998, s 3. Lord Steyn, in particular, advocated a 'wide' approach to interpretation under the HRA 1998, s 3. He reasoned:

'[T]he interpretative obligation under section 3 of the 1998 Act is a strong one. It applies even if there is no ambiguity in the language in the sense of the language being capable of two different meanings … Parliament specifically rejected the legislative model of requiring a reasonable interpretation. Section 3 places a duty on the court to [...] … In accordance with the will of Parliament as reflected in section 3 it will sometimes be necessary to adopt an interpretation which linguistically may appear strained. The techniques to be used will not only involve the reading down of express language in a statute but also the implication of provisions. A declaration of incompatibility is a measure of last resort. It must be avoided unless it is plainly impossible to do so. If a clear limitation on Convention rights is stated in terms, such an impossibility will arise.'

Answer
strive to find a possible interpretation compatible with Convention rights

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
re is no ambiguity in the language in the sense of the language being capable of two different meanings … Parliament specifically rejected the legislative model of requiring a reasonable interpretation. Section 3 places a duty on the court to <span>strive to find a possible interpretation compatible with Convention rights … In accordance with the will of Parliament as reflected in section 3 it will sometimes be necessary to adopt an interpretation which linguistically may appear strained. The techniques t

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1373475835148

Tags
#hra #law #public
Question
The approach to be taken under the HRA towards the interpretation of legislation has been controversial, as can be seen in R v A (Complainant's Sexual History) (No 2) [2001] 2 WLR 1546. The Youth Justice and Criminal Evidence Act 1999, s 41 was designed to restrict the circumstances in which evidence and questioning about a complainant's prior sexual history in trials concerning sexual offences could be permitted. The issue was whether this new provision prejudiced the defendant's right to a fair trial under the ECHR, art 6.

The House of Lords held that the Youth Justice and Criminal Evidence Act 1999, s 41 was incompatible with the right to a fair trial. As a consequence of this finding, their Lordships went on to consider their obligations under the HRA 1998, s 3. Lord Steyn, in particular, advocated a 'wide' approach to interpretation under the HRA 1998, s 3. He reasoned:

'[T]he interpretative obligation under section 3 of the 1998 Act is a strong one. It applies even if there is no ambiguity in the language in the sense of the language being capable of two different meanings … Parliament specifically rejected the legislative model of requiring a reasonable interpretation. Section 3 places a duty on the court to strive to find a possible interpretation compatible with Convention rights … In accordance with the will of Parliament as reflected in section 3 it will sometimes be necessary to adopt an interpretation which linguistically may appear strained. The techniques to be used will not only involve the reading down of express language in a statute but also the implication of provisions. A declaration of incompatibility is a measure of last resort. It must be avoided unless it is plainly impossible to do so. If [...], such an impossibility will arise.'

Answer
a clear limitation on Convention rights is stated in terms

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
used will not only involve the reading down of express language in a statute but also the implication of provisions. A declaration of incompatibility is a measure of last resort. It must be avoided unless it is plainly impossible to do so. If <span>a clear limitation on Convention rights is stated in terms, such an impossibility will arise.' <span><body><html>

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1373476883724

Tags
#hra #law #public
Question
The first decision to consider the meaning and extent of HRA 1998, s 2(1) was [ case ], where the House of Lords held that, while the case law of the ECtHR is not binding, domestic courts should follow any clear and consistent jurisprudence unless there were special circumstances, or the decisions of the ECtHR compelled a conclusion fundamentally at odds with the distribution of powers under the UK constitution.
Answer
R (Alconbury Developments Ltd) v Secretary of State for the Environment, [2001] UKHL 23

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
The first decision to consider the meaning and extent of HRA 1998, s 2(1) was R (Alconbury Developments Ltd) v Secretary of State for the Environment, [2001] UKHL 23, where the House of Lords held that, while the case law of the ECtHR is not binding, domestic courts should follow any clear and consistent jurisprudence unless there were special cir

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1373478718732

Tags
#hra #law #public
Question
The first decision to consider the meaning and extent of HRA 1998, s 2(1) was R (Alconbury Developments Ltd) v Secretary of State for the Environment, [2001] UKHL 23, where the House of Lords held that, while the case law of the ECtHR is not binding, domestic courts should [...] unless there were special circumstances, or the decisions of the ECtHR compelled a conclusion fundamentally at odds with the distribution of powers under the UK constitution.
Answer
follow any clear and consistent jurisprudence

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
meaning and extent of HRA 1998, s 2(1) was R (Alconbury Developments Ltd) v Secretary of State for the Environment, [2001] UKHL 23, where the House of Lords held that, while the case law of the ECtHR is not binding, domestic courts should <span>follow any clear and consistent jurisprudence unless there were special circumstances, or the decisions of the ECtHR compelled a conclusion fundamentally at odds with the distribution of powers under the UK constitution. </

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1373479767308

Tags
#hra #law #public
Question
The first decision to consider the meaning and extent of HRA 1998, s 2(1) was R (Alconbury Developments Ltd) v Secretary of State for the Environment, [2001] UKHL 23, where the House of Lords held that, while the case law of the ECtHR is not binding, domestic courts should follow any clear and consistent jurisprudence unless [...].
Answer
there were special circumstances, or the decisions of the ECtHR compelled a conclusion fundamentally at odds with the distribution of powers under the UK constitution

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
ury Developments Ltd) v Secretary of State for the Environment, [2001] UKHL 23, where the House of Lords held that, while the case law of the ECtHR is not binding, domestic courts should follow any clear and consistent jurisprudence unless <span>there were special circumstances, or the decisions of the ECtHR compelled a conclusion fundamentally at odds with the distribution of powers under the UK constitution. <span><body><html>

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1373480815884

Tags
#hra #law #public
Question
In [ case ], the Court of Appeal undertook a very radical reinterpretation of provisions of the Children Act 1989. The House of Lords reversed this: the opinion of Lord Nicholls provides very useful early guidance on the use of the HRA 1998, s 3:

'In applying section 3 courts must be ever mindful of this outer limit. The Human Rights Act reserves the amendment of primary legislation to Parliament … Interpretation of statutes is a matter for the courts; the enactment of statutes, and the amendment of statutes are matters for Parliament … it is sufficient to say that a meaning which departs substantially from a fundamental feature of an Act of Parliament is likely to have crossed the boundary between interpretation and amendment. This is especially so where the departure has important practical repercussions which the court is not equipped to evaluate.'

Answer
Re S (Children) and Re W (Care Orders) [2002] UKHL 10

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
In Re S (Children) and Re W (Care Orders) [2002] UKHL 10, the Court of Appeal undertook a very radical reinterpretation of provisions of the Children Act 1989. The House of Lords reversed this: the opinion of Lord Nicholls provides very usefu

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1373482650892

Tags
#hra #law #public
Question
In Re S (Children) and Re W (Care Orders) [2002] UKHL 10, the Court of Appeal undertook a very radical reinterpretation of provisions of the Children Act 1989. The House of Lords reversed this: the opinion of Lord Nicholls provides very useful early guidance on the use of the HRA 1998, s 3:

'In applying section 3 courts must be ever mindful of this outer limit. The Human Rights Act reserves the amendment of primary legislation to Parliament … Interpretation of statutes is a matter for the courts; the enactment of statutes, and the amendment of statutes are matters for Parliament … it is sufficient to say that a meaning which [...] is likely to have crossed the boundary between interpretation and amendment. This is especially so where the departure has important practical repercussions which the court is not equipped to evaluate.'

Answer
departs substantially from a fundamental feature of an Act of Parliament

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
ves the amendment of primary legislation to Parliament … Interpretation of statutes is a matter for the courts; the enactment of statutes, and the amendment of statutes are matters for Parliament … it is sufficient to say that a meaning which <span>departs substantially from a fundamental feature of an Act of Parliament is likely to have crossed the boundary between interpretation and amendment. This is especially so where the departure has important practical repercussions which the court is not equipp

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1373483699468

Tags
#hra #law #public
Question
In Re S (Children) and Re W (Care Orders) [2002] UKHL 10, the Court of Appeal undertook a very radical reinterpretation of provisions of the Children Act 1989. The House of Lords reversed this: the opinion of Lord Nicholls provides very useful early guidance on the use of the HRA 1998, s 3:

'In applying section 3 courts must be ever mindful of this outer limit. The Human Rights Act reserves the amendment of primary legislation to Parliament … Interpretation of statutes is a matter for the courts; the enactment of statutes, and the amendment of statutes are matters for Parliament … it is sufficient to say that a meaning which departs substantially from a fundamental feature of an Act of Parliament is likely to [...]. This is especially so where the departure has important practical repercussions which the court is not equipped to evaluate.'

Answer
have crossed the boundary between interpretation and amendment

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
a matter for the courts; the enactment of statutes, and the amendment of statutes are matters for Parliament … it is sufficient to say that a meaning which departs substantially from a fundamental feature of an Act of Parliament is likely to <span>have crossed the boundary between interpretation and amendment. This is especially so where the departure has important practical repercussions which the court is not equipped to evaluate.' <span><body><html>

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1373484748044

Tags
#hra #law #public
Question
In Re S (Children) and Re W (Care Orders) [2002] UKHL 10, the Court of Appeal undertook a very radical reinterpretation of provisions of the Children Act 1989. The House of Lords reversed this: the opinion of Lord Nicholls provides very useful early guidance on the use of the HRA 1998, s 3:

'In applying section 3 courts must be ever mindful of this outer limit. The Human Rights Act reserves the amendment of primary legislation to Parliament … Interpretation of statutes is a matter for the courts; the enactment of statutes, and the amendment of statutes are matters for Parliament … it is sufficient to say that a meaning which departs substantially from a fundamental feature of an Act of Parliament is likely to have crossed the boundary between interpretation and amendment. This is especially so where [...].'

Answer
the departure has important practical repercussions which the court is not equipped to evaluate

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
rs for Parliament … it is sufficient to say that a meaning which departs substantially from a fundamental feature of an Act of Parliament is likely to have crossed the boundary between interpretation and amendment. This is especially so where <span>the departure has important practical repercussions which the court is not equipped to evaluate.' <span><body><html>

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1373485796620

Tags
#hra #law #public
Question
It seems therefore that, where the use of the HRA 1998, s 3 would [...], the courts will be more unwilling to use the HRA 1998, s 3.
Answer
represent a major change in the law, having far-reaching consequences

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
It seems therefore that, where the use of the HRA 1998, s 3 would represent a major change in the law, having far-reaching consequences, the courts will be more unwilling to use the HRA 1998, s 3.

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1373486845196

Tags
#hra #law #public
Question
In [ case ] the House of Lords used the HRA 1998, s 3to read in the additional words 'as his husband and wife' into the Rent Act 1977, s 76(1) in order to make it compatible with the Convention. The law lords held that the courts should take a broad approach to interpretation under the HRA 1998, s 3. What mattered in their view was the substance of the legislative provision being interpreted rather than the particular phraseology or form of words that were used. In order to make a provision convention- compliant, a court may be required to depart form the clear and unambiguous meaning that the provision would otherwise have borne. The court can interpret the language restrictively or expansively. It can read in words which change the meaning of the legislation.
Answer
Ghaidan v Godin-Mendoza [2004] UKHL 30

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
In Ghaidan v Godin-Mendoza [2004] UKHL 30 the House of Lords used the HRA 1998, s 3to read in the additional words 'as his husband and wife' into the Rent Act 1977, s 76(1) in order to make it compatible with the Convention. T

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1373488680204

Tags
#hra #law #public
Question
In Ghaidan v Godin-Mendoza [2004] UKHL 30 the House of Lords used the HRA 1998, s 3to [...] into the Rent Act 1977, s 76(1) in order to make it compatible with the Convention. The law lords held that the courts should take a broad approach to interpretation under the HRA 1998, s 3. What mattered in their view was the substance of the legislative provision being interpreted rather than the particular phraseology or form of words that were used. In order to make a provision convention- compliant, a court may be required to depart form the clear and unambiguous meaning that the provision would otherwise have borne. The court can interpret the language restrictively or expansively. It can read in words which change the meaning of the legislation.
Answer
read in the additional words 'as his husband and wife'

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
In Ghaidan v Godin-Mendoza [2004] UKHL 30 the House of Lords used the HRA 1998, s 3to read in the additional words 'as his husband and wife' into the Rent Act 1977, s 76(1) in order to make it compatible with the Convention. The law lords held that the courts should take a broad approach to interpretation under the HRA 1998

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1373489728780

Tags
#hra #law #public
Question
In Ghaidan v Godin-Mendoza [2004] UKHL 30 the House of Lords used the HRA 1998, s 3to read in the additional words 'as his husband and wife' into the Rent Act 1977, s 76(1) in order to make it compatible with the Convention. The law lords held that the courts should take a broad approach to interpretation under the HRA 1998, s 3. What mattered in their view was [...]. In order to make a provision convention- compliant, a court may be required to depart form the clear and unambiguous meaning that the provision would otherwise have borne. The court can interpret the language restrictively or expansively. It can read in words which change the meaning of the legislation.
Answer
the substance of the legislative provision being interpreted rather than the particular phraseology or form of words that were used

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
usband and wife' into the Rent Act 1977, s 76(1) in order to make it compatible with the Convention. The law lords held that the courts should take a broad approach to interpretation under the HRA 1998, s 3. What mattered in their view was <span>the substance of the legislative provision being interpreted rather than the particular phraseology or form of words that were used. In order to make a provision convention- compliant, a court may be required to depart form the clear and unambiguous meaning that the provision would otherwise have borne. The court c

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1373490777356

Tags
#hra #law #public
Question
Lord Hoffmann, in [ case ], made the following comments on the scope of the HRA 1998, s 3 and the interpretative obligation it imposes on courts:

'I do not believe that section 3 of the 1998 Act was intended to have the effect of requiring the courts to give the language of statutes acontextual meanings. That would be playing games with words. The important change in the process of interpretation which was made by section 3 was to deem the Convention to form a significant part of the background against which all statutes, whether passed before or after the 1998 Act came into force, had to be interpreted. Just as the "principle of legality" meant that statutes were construed against the background of human rights subsisting at common law (see R v Home Secretary, Ex p Simms [2000] 2 AC 115), so now, section 3 requires them to be construed against the background of Convention rights. There is a strong presumption, arising from the fundamental nature of Convention rights, that Parliament did not intend a statute to mean something which would be incompatible with those rights. This of course goes far beyond the old-fashioned notion of using background to "resolve ambiguities" in a text which had notionally been read without raising one's eyes to look beyond it. The Convention, like the rest of the admissible background, forms part of the primary materials for the process of interpretation. But, with the addition of the Convention as background, the question is still one of interpretation, i.e. the ascertainment of what, taking into account the presumption created by section 3, Parliament would reasonably be understood to have meant by using the actual language of the statute. It is therefore sometimes possible, as my noble and learned friend Lord Nicholls of Birkenhead pointed out in Ghaidan v Godin-Mendoza [2004] 2 AC 557, paras 26–33, to construe a statutory provision as referring to, or qualified by, some general concept implied rather than expressly mentioned in the language used by Parliament. Thus in the Ghaidan case, the words "as his or her wife or husband" (my emphasis) were interpreted to refer to a relationship of social and sexual intimacy exemplified by, but not limited to, the heterosexual relationship of husband and wife. The deemed background of the Convention enabled the House to adopt this construction in preference to the more restricted construction adopted before the 1998 Act came into force. It may have come as a surprise to the members of the Parliament which in 1988 enacted the statute construed in the Ghaidan case that the relationship to which they were referring could include homosexual relationships. In that sense the construction may have been contrary to the "intention of Parliament". But that is not normally what one means by the intention of Parliament. One means the interpretation which the reasonable reader would give to the statute read against its background, including, now, an assumption that it was not intended to be incompatible with Convention rights.'

Answer
R (Wilkinson) v Inland Revenue Commissioners [2005] UKHL 30 (at paragraphs 17-18)

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
Lord Hoffmann, in R (Wilkinson) v Inland Revenue Commissioners [2005] UKHL 30 (at paragraphs 17-18), made the following comments on the scope of the HRA 1998, s 3 and the interpretative obligation it imposes on courts: 'I do not believe that section 3 of the 1998 Act was

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1373492612364

Tags
#hra #law #public
Question
Lord Hoffmann, in R (Wilkinson) v Inland Revenue Commissioners [2005] UKHL 30 (at paragraphs 17-18), made the following comments on the scope of the HRA 1998, s 3 and the interpretative obligation it imposes on courts:

'I do not believe that section 3 of the 1998 Act was intended to have the effect of requiring the courts to give the language of statutes acontextual meanings. That would be playing games with words. The important change in the process of interpretation which was made by section 3 was to deem the Convention to form a significant part of the background against which all statutes, whether passed before or after the 1998 Act came into force, had to be interpreted. Just as the "principle of legality" meant that statutes were construed against the background of human rights subsisting at common law (see R v Home Secretary, Ex p Simms [2000] 2 AC 115), so now, section 3 requires them to be construed against the background of Convention rights. There is a strong presumption, arising from the fundamental nature of Convention rights, that [...]. This of course goes far beyond the old-fashioned notion of using background to "resolve ambiguities" in a text which had notionally been read without raising one's eyes to look beyond it. The Convention, like the rest of the admissible background, forms part of the primary materials for the process of interpretation. But, with the addition of the Convention as background, the question is still one of interpretation, i.e. the ascertainment of what, taking into account the presumption created by section 3, Parliament would reasonably be understood to have meant by using the actual language of the statute. It is therefore sometimes possible, as my noble and learned friend Lord Nicholls of Birkenhead pointed out in Ghaidan v Godin-Mendoza [2004] 2 AC 557, paras 26–33, to construe a statutory provision as referring to, or qualified by, some general concept implied rather than expressly mentioned in the language used by Parliament. Thus in the Ghaidan case, the words "as his or her wife or husband" (my emphasis) were interpreted to refer to a relationship of social and sexual intimacy exemplified by, but not limited to, the heterosexual relationship of husband and wife. The deemed background of the Convention enabled the House to adopt this construction in preference to the more restricted construction adopted before the 1998 Act came into force. It may have come as a surprise to the members of the Parliament which in 1988 enacted the statute construed in the Ghaidan case that the relationship to which they were referring could include homosexual relationships. In that sense the construction may have been contrary to the "intention of Parliament". But that is not normally what one means by the intention of Parliament. One means the interpretation which the reasonable reader would give to the statute read against its background, including, now, an assumption that it was not intended to be incompatible with Convention rights.'

Answer
Parliament did not intend a statute to mean something which would be incompatible with those rights

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
w (see R v Home Secretary, Ex p Simms [2000] 2 AC 115), so now, section 3 requires them to be construed against the background of Convention rights. There is a strong presumption, arising from the fundamental nature of Convention rights, that <span>Parliament did not intend a statute to mean something which would be incompatible with those rights. This of course goes far beyond the old-fashioned notion of using background to "resolve ambiguities" in a text which had notionally been read without raising one's eyes to lo

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1373493660940

Tags
#hra #law #public
Question
Lord Hoffmann, in R (Wilkinson) v Inland Revenue Commissioners [2005] UKHL 30 (at paragraphs 17-18), made the following comments on the scope of the HRA 1998, s 3 and the interpretative obligation it imposes on courts:

'I do not believe that section 3 of the 1998 Act was intended to have the effect of requiring the courts to give the language of statutes acontextual meanings. That would be playing games with words. The important change in the process of interpretation which was made by section 3 was to deem the Convention to form a significant part of the background against which all statutes, whether passed before or after the 1998 Act came into force, had to be interpreted. Just as the "principle of legality" meant that statutes were construed against the background of human rights subsisting at common law (see R v Home Secretary, Ex p Simms [2000] 2 AC 115), so now, section 3 requires them to be construed against the background of Convention rights. There is a strong presumption, arising from the fundamental nature of Convention rights, that Parliament did not intend a statute to mean something which would be incompatible with those rights. This of course goes far beyond the old-fashioned notion of using background to "resolve ambiguities" in a text which had notionally been read without raising one's eyes to look beyond it. The Convention, like the rest of the admissible background, forms part of the primary materials for the process of interpretation. But, with the addition of the Convention as background, the question is still one of interpretation, i.e. [...]. It is therefore sometimes possible, as my noble and learned friend Lord Nicholls of Birkenhead pointed out in Ghaidan v Godin-Mendoza [2004] 2 AC 557, paras 26–33, to construe a statutory provision as referring to, or qualified by, some general concept implied rather than expressly mentioned in the language used by Parliament. Thus in the Ghaidan case, the words "as his or her wife or husband" (my emphasis) were interpreted to refer to a relationship of social and sexual intimacy exemplified by, but not limited to, the heterosexual relationship of husband and wife. The deemed background of the Convention enabled the House to adopt this construction in preference to the more restricted construction adopted before the 1998 Act came into force. It may have come as a surprise to the members of the Parliament which in 1988 enacted the statute construed in the Ghaidan case that the relationship to which they were referring could include homosexual relationships. In that sense the construction may have been contrary to the "intention of Parliament". But that is not normally what one means by the intention of Parliament. One means the interpretation which the reasonable reader would give to the statute read against its background, including, now, an assumption that it was not intended to be incompatible with Convention rights.'

Answer
the ascertainment of what, taking into account the presumption created by section 3, Parliament would reasonably be understood to have meant by using the actual language of the statute

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
d it. The Convention, like the rest of the admissible background, forms part of the primary materials for the process of interpretation. But, with the addition of the Convention as background, the question is still one of interpretation, i.e. <span>the ascertainment of what, taking into account the presumption created by section 3, Parliament would reasonably be understood to have meant by using the actual language of the statute. It is therefore sometimes possible, as my noble and learned friend Lord Nicholls of Birkenhead pointed out in Ghaidan v Godin-Mendoza [2004] 2 AC 557, paras 26–33, to construe a statut

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1373494709516

Tags
#hra #law #public
Question
Lord Hoffmann, in R (Wilkinson) v Inland Revenue Commissioners [2005] UKHL 30 (at paragraphs 17-18), made the following comments on the scope of the HRA 1998, s 3 and the interpretative obligation it imposes on courts:

'I do not believe that section 3 of the 1998 Act was intended to have the effect of requiring the courts to give the language of statutes acontextual meanings. That would be playing games with words. The important change in the process of interpretation which was made by section 3 was to deem the Convention to form a significant part of the background against which all statutes, whether passed before or after the 1998 Act came into force, had to be interpreted. Just as the "principle of legality" meant that statutes were construed against the background of human rights subsisting at common law (see R v Home Secretary, Ex p Simms [2000] 2 AC 115), so now, section 3 requires them to be construed against the background of Convention rights. There is a strong presumption, arising from the fundamental nature of Convention rights, that Parliament did not intend a statute to mean something which would be incompatible with those rights. This of course goes far beyond the old-fashioned notion of using background to "resolve ambiguities" in a text which had notionally been read without raising one's eyes to look beyond it. The Convention, like the rest of the admissible background, forms part of the primary materials for the process of interpretation. But, with the addition of the Convention as background, the question is still one of interpretation, i.e. the ascertainment of what, taking into account the presumption created by section 3, Parliament would reasonably be understood to have meant by using the actual language of the statute. It is therefore sometimes possible, as my noble and learned friend Lord Nicholls of Birkenhead pointed out in Ghaidan v Godin-Mendoza [2004] 2 AC 557, paras 26–33, to construe a statutory provision as [...]. Thus in the Ghaidan case, the words "as his or her wife or husband" (my emphasis) were interpreted to refer to a relationship of social and sexual intimacy exemplified by, but not limited to, the heterosexual relationship of husband and wife. The deemed background of the Convention enabled the House to adopt this construction in preference to the more restricted construction adopted before the 1998 Act came into force. It may have come as a surprise to the members of the Parliament which in 1988 enacted the statute construed in the Ghaidan case that the relationship to which they were referring could include homosexual relationships. In that sense the construction may have been contrary to the "intention of Parliament". But that is not normally what one means by the intention of Parliament. One means the interpretation which the reasonable reader would give to the statute read against its background, including, now, an assumption that it was not intended to be incompatible with Convention rights.'

Answer
referring to, or qualified by, some general concept implied rather than expressly mentioned in the language used by Parliament

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
using the actual language of the statute. It is therefore sometimes possible, as my noble and learned friend Lord Nicholls of Birkenhead pointed out in Ghaidan v Godin-Mendoza [2004] 2 AC 557, paras 26–33, to construe a statutory provision as <span>referring to, or qualified by, some general concept implied rather than expressly mentioned in the language used by Parliament. Thus in the Ghaidan case, the words "as his or her wife or husband" (my emphasis) were interpreted to refer to a relationship of social and sexual intimacy exemplified by, bu

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1373495758092

Tags
#hra #law #public
Question
Lord Hoffmann, in R (Wilkinson) v Inland Revenue Commissioners [2005] UKHL 30 (at paragraphs 17-18), made the following comments on the scope of the HRA 1998, s 3 and the interpretative obligation it imposes on courts:

'I do not believe that section 3 of the 1998 Act was intended to have the effect of requiring the courts to give the language of statutes acontextual meanings. That would be playing games with words. The important change in the process of interpretation which was made by section 3 was to deem the Convention to form a significant part of the background against which all statutes, whether passed before or after the 1998 Act came into force, had to be interpreted. Just as the "principle of legality" meant that statutes were construed against the background of human rights subsisting at common law (see R v Home Secretary, Ex p Simms [2000] 2 AC 115), so now, section 3 requires them to be construed against the background of Convention rights. There is a strong presumption, arising from the fundamental nature of Convention rights, that Parliament did not intend a statute to mean something which would be incompatible with those rights. This of course goes far beyond the old-fashioned notion of using background to "resolve ambiguities" in a text which had notionally been read without raising one's eyes to look beyond it. The Convention, like the rest of the admissible background, forms part of the primary materials for the process of interpretation. But, with the addition of the Convention as background, the question is still one of interpretation, i.e. the ascertainment of what, taking into account the presumption created by section 3, Parliament would reasonably be understood to have meant by using the actual language of the statute. It is therefore sometimes possible, as my noble and learned friend Lord Nicholls of Birkenhead pointed out in Ghaidan v Godin-Mendoza [2004] 2 AC 557, paras 26–33, to construe a statutory provision as referring to, or qualified by, some general concept implied rather than expressly mentioned in the language used by Parliament. Thus in the Ghaidan case, the words "as his or her wife or husband" (my emphasis) were interpreted to refer to a relationship of social and sexual intimacy exemplified by, but not limited to, the heterosexual relationship of husband and wife. The deemed background of the Convention enabled the House to adopt this construction in preference to the more restricted construction adopted before the 1998 Act came into force. It may have come as a surprise to the members of the Parliament which in 1988 enacted the statute construed in the Ghaidan case that the relationship to which they were referring could include homosexual relationships. In that sense the construction may have been contrary to the "intention of Parliament". But that is not normally what one means by the intention of Parliament. One means [...].'

Answer
the interpretation which the reasonable reader would give to the statute read against its background, including, now, an assumption that it was not intended to be incompatible with Convention rights

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
ch they were referring could include homosexual relationships. In that sense the construction may have been contrary to the "intention of Parliament". But that is not normally what one means by the intention of Parliament. One means <span>the interpretation which the reasonable reader would give to the statute read against its background, including, now, an assumption that it was not intended to be incompatible with Convention rights.' <span><body><html>

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1373496806668

Tags
#hra #law #public
Question
A more recent example of the courts applying the HRA 1998, s 3(1) is provided by [ case ]. The case concerned a local housing authority which sought a possession order from the county court under the Housing Act 1996, s 143 on the grounds of anti-social behaviour on the part of a 'demoted' tenant. It was held by the Supreme Court that county court judges were required by the ECHR, art 8 to consider the proportionality of evicting a person from his home when granting this type of possession order. It was noted that the Housing Act 1996, s 143 had been drafted by Parliament with the intention that county court judges would grant possession orders against demoted tenants once the housing authority had adhered to the procedural requirements contained within the Act. The Supreme Court, however, read the word 'lawful' into the Housing Act 1996, s 143 (using its power under the HRA 1998, s 3(1)), so that county court judges could review the proportionality of the possession order.
Answer
Pinnock v Manchester City Council [2010] UKSC 45

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
A more recent example of the courts applying the HRA 1998, s 3(1) is provided by Pinnock v Manchester City Council [2010] UKSC 45. The case concerned a local housing authority which sought a possession order from the county court under the Housing Act 1996, s 143 on the grounds of anti-social behaviour on the part

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1373498641676

Tags
#hra #law #public
Question
The case concerned a local housing authority which sought a possession order from the county court under the Housing Act 1996, s 143 on the grounds of anti-social behaviour on the part of a 'demoted' tenant. It was held by the Supreme Court that county court judges were required by the ECHR, art 8 to consider the proportionality of evicting a person from his home when granting this type of possession order. It was noted that the Housing Act 1996, s 143 had been drafted by Parliament with the intention that county court judges would grant possession orders against demoted tenants once the housing authority had adhered to the procedural requirements contained within the Act. The Supreme Court, however, read the word 'lawful' into the Housing Act 1996, s 143 (using its power under the HRA 1998, s 3(1)), so that county court judges could review the proportionality of the possession order.
Answer
Pinnock v Manchester City Council [2010] UKSC 45

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
A more recent example of the courts applying the HRA 1998, s 3(1) is provided by Pinnock v Manchester City Council [2010] UKSC 45. The case concerned a local housing authority which sought a possession order from the county court under the Housing Act 1996, s 143 on the grounds of anti-social behaviour on the part

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1373500476684

Tags
#hra #law #public
Question
A more recent example of the courts applying the HRA 1998, s 3(1) is provided by Pinnock v Manchester City Council [2010] UKSC 45. The case concerned a local housing authority which sought a possession order from the county court under the Housing Act 1996, s 143 on the grounds of anti-social behaviour on the part of a 'demoted' tenant. It was held by the Supreme Court that county court judges were required by the ECHR, art 8 to consider the proportionality of evicting a person from his home when granting this type of possession order. It was noted that the Housing Act 1996, s 143 had been drafted by Parliament with the intention that county court judges would grant possession orders against demoted tenants once the housing authority had adhered to the procedural requirements contained within the Act. The Supreme Court, however, [...] into the Housing Act 1996, s 143 (using its power under the HRA 1998, s 3(1)), so that county court judges could review the proportionality of the possession order.
Answer
read the word 'lawful'

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
rafted by Parliament with the intention that county court judges would grant possession orders against demoted tenants once the housing authority had adhered to the procedural requirements contained within the Act. The Supreme Court, however, <span>read the word 'lawful' into the Housing Act 1996, s 143 (using its power under the HRA 1998, s 3(1)), so that county court judges could review the proportionality of the possession order.<span><body><

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1373501525260

Tags
#hra #law #public
Question
in situations where the court does not consider it appropriate to adopt a HRA 1998, s 3 interpretation of relevant law, it may make a declaration that a particular provision is incompatible with an ECHR right: see the [ statute ] regarding primary legislation and the HRA 1998, s 4(4) regarding subordinate legislation.
Answer
HRA 1998, s 4(2)

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
head>in situations where the court does not consider it appropriate to adopt a HRA 1998, s 3 interpretation of relevant law, it may make a declaration that a particular provision is incompatible with an ECHR right: see the HRA 1998, s 4(2) regarding primary legislation and the HRA 1998, s 4(4) regarding subordinate legislation.<html>

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1373503360268

Tags
#hra #law #public
Question
in situations where the court does not consider it appropriate to adopt a HRA 1998, s 3 interpretation of relevant law, it may make a declaration that a particular provision is incompatible with an ECHR right: see the HRA 1998, s 4(2) regarding primary legislation and the [ statute ] regarding subordinate legislation.
Answer
HRA 1998, s 4(4)

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
s not consider it appropriate to adopt a HRA 1998, s 3 interpretation of relevant law, it may make a declaration that a particular provision is incompatible with an ECHR right: see the HRA 1998, s 4(2) regarding primary legislation and the <span>HRA 1998, s 4(4) regarding subordinate legislation.<span><body><html>

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1373505195276

Tags
#hra #law #public
Question
In [ case ], the House of Lords made a declaration under the HRA 1998, s 4 that the Anti-Terrorism, Crime and Security Act 2001, s 23 was incompatible with the ECHR, arts 5 and 14, insofar as it was disproportionate and permitted detention of suspected international terrorists without charge or trial and discriminated on the ground of nationality or immigration status.
Answer
A and Others v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2004] UKHL 56

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
In A and Others v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2004] UKHL 56, the House of Lords made a declaration under the HRA 1998, s 4 that the Anti-Terrorism, Crime and Security Act 2001, s 23 was incompatible with the ECHR, arts 5 and 14, insofar as it

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1373507030284

Tags
#hra #law #public
Question
In A and Others v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2004] UKHL 56, the House of Lords made a declaration under the HRA 1998, s 4 that the Anti-Terrorism, Crime and Security Act 2001, s 23 was incompatible with the ECHR, arts 5 and 14, insofar as [...].
Answer
it was disproportionate and permitted detention of suspected international terrorists without charge or trial and discriminated on the ground of nationality or immigration status

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2004] UKHL 56, the House of Lords made a declaration under the HRA 1998, s 4 that the Anti-Terrorism, Crime and Security Act 2001, s 23 was incompatible with the ECHR, arts 5 and 14, insofar as <span>it was disproportionate and permitted detention of suspected international terrorists without charge or trial and discriminated on the ground of nationality or immigration status.<span><body><html>

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1373508078860

Tags
#hra #law #public
Question
See too the case of [ case ] where the House of Lords found the Crime (Sentences) Act 1997, s 29 to be incompatible with the ECHR, art 6(1), as it left the decision on tariffs for mandatory life term prisoners solely in the hands of the Home Secretary.
Answer
R (Anderson) v Secretary of State for the Home Department, [2002] UKHL 46

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
See too the case of R (Anderson) v Secretary of State for the Home Department, [2002] UKHL 46 where the House of Lords found the Crime (Sentences) Act 1997, s 29 to be incompatible with the ECHR, art 6(1), as it left the decision on tariffs for mandatory life term prisoners sole

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1373509913868

Tags
#hra #law #public
Question
The public authority may, however, appeal against a decision to make a declaration under the HRA 1998, s 4. See, for instance, the case of [ case ] where the House of Lords overturned a declaration made by the Court of Appeal that the Mental Health Act 1983, s 2 was incompatible with the ECHR, art 5 (4).
Answer
R (on the application of H) v Secretary of State for Health, [2005] UKHL 60

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
The public authority may, however, appeal against a decision to make a declaration under the HRA 1998, s 4. See, for instance, the case of R (on the application of H) v Secretary of State for Health, [2005] UKHL 60 where the House of Lords overturned a declaration made by the Court of Appeal that the Mental Health Act 1983, s 2 was incompatible with the ECHR, art 5 (4).

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1373511748876

Tags
#hra #law #public
Question
The [ statute ] provides that, in response to a declaration of incompatibility made under the HRA 1998, s 4 (or to a decision of the ECHR), the relevant ministers may take expedited 'remedial action' to amend the relevant legislation as necessary to remove the incompatibility, if 'there are compelling reasons for proceeding under this section'.
Answer
HRA 1998, s 10(2)

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
The HRA 1998, s 10(2) provides that, in response to a declaration of incompatibility made under the HRA 1998, s 4 (or to a decision of the ECHR), the relevant ministers may take expedited 'remedial action'

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1373513583884

Tags
#hra #law #public
Question
In [ case ], Lord Hope provided the following guidance with respect to the defence under the HRA 1998, s 6(2):

'The situation to which paragraph (a) is addressed arises where the effect of the primary legislation is that the authority has no alternative but to do what the legislation tells it to do. The language of the paragraph tells us that this may be the result of one provision taken by itself, or that it may be the result of two or more provisions taken together. Where more than one provision is involved, they may be part of one enactment or they may be found in several different enactments. The key to its application lies in the fact that the effect of this legislation, wherever it is found, is that a duty is imposed on the authority. If the legislation imposes a duty to act, the authority is obliged to act in the manner which the legislation lays down even if the legislation requires it to act in a way which is incompatible with a Convention right. The authority has no discretion to do otherwise. As it is a duty which has been imposed on the authority by or as a result of primary legislation, Parliamentary sovereignty prevails over the Convention right. The defence is provided to prevent the legislation from being rendered unenforceable. The situation to which paragraph (b) is addressed on the other hand arises where the authority has a discretion, which it has the power to exercise or not to exercise as it chooses, to give effect to or enforce provisions of or made under primary legislation which cannot be read or given effect to in a way which is compatible with the Convention rights. The source of that discretion may be in a single statutory provision which confers a power on the authority which it may or may not choose to exercise.'

Answer
R v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, ex parte Hooper [2005] UKHL 29

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
In R v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, ex parte Hooper [2005] UKHL 29, Lord Hope provided the following guidance with respect to the defence under the HRA 1998, s 6(2): 'The situation to which paragraph (a) is addressed arises where the effec

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1373515418892

Tags
#hra #law #public
Question
In R v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, ex parte Hooper [2005] UKHL 29, Lord Hope provided the following guidance with respect to the defence under the HRA 1998, s 6(2):

'The situation to which paragraph (a) is addressed arises where the effect of the primary legislation is that the authority has no alternative but to do what the legislation tells it to do. The language of the paragraph tells us that this may be the result of one provision taken by itself, or that it may be the result of two or more provisions taken together. Where more than one provision is involved, they may be part of one enactment or they may be found in several different enactments. The key to its application lies in the fact that the effect of this legislation, wherever it is found, is that a duty is imposed on the authority. If [...]. The authority has no discretion to do otherwise. As it is a duty which has been imposed on the authority by or as a result of primary legislation, Parliamentary sovereignty prevails over the Convention right. The defence is provided to prevent the legislation from being rendered unenforceable. The situation to which paragraph (b) is addressed on the other hand arises where the authority has a discretion, which it has the power to exercise or not to exercise as it chooses, to give effect to or enforce provisions of or made under primary legislation which cannot be read or given effect to in a way which is compatible with the Convention rights. The source of that discretion may be in a single statutory provision which confers a power on the authority which it may or may not choose to exercise.'

Answer
the legislation imposes a duty to act, the authority is obliged to act in the manner which the legislation lays down even if the legislation requires it to act in a way which is incompatible with a Convention right

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
ved, they may be part of one enactment or they may be found in several different enactments. The key to its application lies in the fact that the effect of this legislation, wherever it is found, is that a duty is imposed on the authority. If <span>the legislation imposes a duty to act, the authority is obliged to act in the manner which the legislation lays down even if the legislation requires it to act in a way which is incompatible with a Convention right. The authority has no discretion to do otherwise. As it is a duty which has been imposed on the authority by or as a result of primary legislation, Parliamentary sovereignty prevails ov

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1373516467468

Tags
#hra #law #public
Question
The Leonard Cheshire Foundation provided accommodation in a care home for residents with disabilities whose places were being funded by a local authority under the National Assistance Act 1948. The charity decided to re-develop the home which meant that certain existing residents could not remain. The residents sought judicial review of the decision, arguing that the loss of their home constituted a violation of the ECHR, art 8 (right to respect for home). The crucial question was whether the charity was exercising a public function for the purposes of the HRA 1998. The Court of Appeal adopted the criteria set out in Poplar and found that the HRA 1998, s 6(3)(b) did not apply to the managers of the care home. It noted that there was no material distinction between the services they provided for residents funded by the local authority and those it provided to privately funded residents. Furthermore, although the Foundation was performing a function delegated under statutory authority, it was not itself exercising statutory powers. On the facts, the Foundation was held not to be 'enmeshed' in the activities of the local authority in the same way that Poplar Housing had been.
Answer
R (Heather) v Leonard Cheshire Foundation [2002] 2 All ER 936

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
The second case to deal with the HRA 1998, s 6(3)(b) was R (Heather) v Leonard Cheshire Foundation [2002] 2 All ER 936. The Leonard Cheshire Foundation provided accommodation in a care home for residents with disabilities whose places were being funded by a local authority under the National Assistan

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1373518302476

Tags
#hra #law #public
Question
The second case to deal with the HRA 1998, s 6(3)(b) was R (Heather) v Leonard Cheshire Foundation [2002] 2 All ER 936. The Leonard Cheshire Foundation provided accommodation in a care home for residents with disabilities whose places were being funded by a local authority under the National Assistance Act 1948. The charity decided to re-develop the home which meant that certain existing residents could not remain. The residents sought judicial review of the decision, arguing that the loss of their home constituted a violation of the ECHR, art 8 (right to respect for home). The crucial question was whether the charity was exercising a public function for the purposes of the HRA 1998. The Court of Appeal adopted the criteria set out in Poplar and found that the HRA 1998, s 6(3)(b) did not apply to the managers of the care home. It noted that [...]. Furthermore, although the Foundation was performing a function delegated under statutory authority, it was not itself exercising statutory powers. On the facts, the Foundation was held not to be 'enmeshed' in the activities of the local authority in the same way that Poplar Housing had been.
Answer
there was no material distinction between the services they provided for residents funded by the local authority and those it provided to privately funded residents

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
the charity was exercising a public function for the purposes of the HRA 1998. The Court of Appeal adopted the criteria set out in Poplar and found that the HRA 1998, s 6(3)(b) did not apply to the managers of the care home. It noted that <span>there was no material distinction between the services they provided for residents funded by the local authority and those it provided to privately funded residents. Furthermore, although the Foundation was performing a function delegated under statutory authority, it was not itself exercising statutory powers. On the facts, the Foundation was he

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1373519351052

Tags
#hra #law #public
Question
The second case to deal with the HRA 1998, s 6(3)(b) was R (Heather) v Leonard Cheshire Foundation [2002] 2 All ER 936. The Leonard Cheshire Foundation provided accommodation in a care home for residents with disabilities whose places were being funded by a local authority under the National Assistance Act 1948. The charity decided to re-develop the home which meant that certain existing residents could not remain. The residents sought judicial review of the decision, arguing that the loss of their home constituted a violation of the ECHR, art 8 (right to respect for home). The crucial question was whether the charity was exercising a public function for the purposes of the HRA 1998. The Court of Appeal adopted the criteria set out in Poplar and found that the HRA 1998, s 6(3)(b) did not apply to the managers of the care home. It noted that there was no material distinction between the services they provided for residents funded by the local authority and those it provided to privately funded residents. Furthermore, although the Foundation was [...]. On the facts, the Foundation was held not to be 'enmeshed' in the activities of the local authority in the same way that Poplar Housing had been.
Answer
performing a function delegated under statutory authority, it was not itself exercising statutory powers

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
of the care home. It noted that there was no material distinction between the services they provided for residents funded by the local authority and those it provided to privately funded residents. Furthermore, although the Foundation was <span>performing a function delegated under statutory authority, it was not itself exercising statutory powers. On the facts, the Foundation was held not to be 'enmeshed' in the activities of the local authority in the same way that Poplar Housing had been.<span><body><html>

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1373520399628

Tags
#hra #law #public
Question
As indicated above, the concept of 'public authority', both core and functional, was reviewed by the House of Lords in Aston Cantlow, which was decided after Poplar and Leonard Cheshire. (Although note that these cases were not specifically overruled by the House of Lords.) The House of Lords stressed that it was [...] that should determine whether a body was a functional public authority. Lord Nicholls suggested that there should be a 'generously wide' interpretation of public function so as to further the statutory aim of promoting human rights protection. Lord Hope stated that the concept of a functional public authority:

'… has a much wider reach, and is sensitive to the facts of each case. It is the function that the person is performing that is determinative of the question whether it is a … "hybrid" [functional] public authority.'

Lord Nicholls (para 12) suggested that the following factors may be relevant in assessing whether or not the relevant function is a public one:
(a) the extent to which, in carrying out the function, the body is publicly funded; or
(b) exercising statutory power; or
(c) taking the place of central government or local authorities; or
(d) is providing a public service.
Answer
the nature of the function being performed

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
ctional, was reviewed by the House of Lords in Aston Cantlow, which was decided after Poplar and Leonard Cheshire. (Although note that these cases were not specifically overruled by the House of Lords.) The House of Lords stressed that it was <span>the nature of the function being performed that should determine whether a body was a functional public authority. Lord Nicholls suggested that there should be a 'generously wide' interpretation of public function so as to furthe

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1373523283212

Tags
#hra #law #public
Question
In Aston Cantlow Lord Nicholls (para 12) suggested that the following factors may be relevant in assessing whether or not the relevant function is a public one: (4)
Answer
(a) the extent to which, in carrying out the function, the body is publicly funded; or
(b) exercising statutory power; or
(c) taking the place of central government or local authorities; or
(d) is providing a public service.

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
In Aston Cantlow Lord Nicholls (para 12) suggested that the following factors may be relevant in assessing whether or not the relevant function is a public one: (a) the extent to which, in carrying out the function, the body is publicly funded; or (b) exercising statutory power; or (c) taking the place of central government or local au

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1373525118220

Tags
#hra #law #public
Question
In [ case ] Lord Nicholls (para 12) suggested that the following factors may be relevant in assessing whether or not the relevant function is a public one:
(a) the extent to which, in carrying out the function, the body is publicly funded; or
(b) exercising statutory power; or
(c) taking the place of central government or local authorities; or
(d) is providing a public service.
Answer
Aston Cantlow

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
In Aston Cantlow Lord Nicholls (para 12) suggested that the following factors may be relevant in assessing whether or not the relevant function is a public one: (a) the extent to which, in carrying

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1373526953228

Tags
#hra #law #public
Question
To determine whether the Parochial Church Council was performing a public function in Aston Cantlow, the House of Lords stressed the importance of considering the nature of the particular act being carried out by the body in question. In the instant case, the PCC was trying to enforce an obligation to repair against the lay rectors. Their Lordships decided that this was not a public function. Lord Hope stated: 'The function which it is performing [...]'.
Answer
has nothing to do with the responsibilities which are owed to the public by the State

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
by the body in question. In the instant case, the PCC was trying to enforce an obligation to repair against the lay rectors. Their Lordships decided that this was not a public function. Lord Hope stated: 'The function which it is performing <span>has nothing to do with the responsibilities which are owed to the public by the State'.<span><body><html>

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1373528001804

Tags
#hra #law #public
Question
The most important recent case dealing with the concept of what constitutes the performance of a public function is [case]. This case involved the provision of care and accommodation in privately run care homes for the elderly. In the Court of Appeal, Lord Justice Buxton confirmed that, following Leonard Cheshire, a private care home, when accommodating the appellants, was not performing the functions of a public authority under the HRA 1998, s 6(3)(b). The House of Lords, in a 3-2 majority decision, confirmed that the care home was not a functional public authority for the purposes of the HRA 1998. Lord Scott (in the majority) summarised as follows at paragraph 26:

'Southern Cross is a company carrying on a socially useful business for profit. It is neither a charity nor a philanthropist. It enters into private law contracts with the residents in its care homes and with the local authorities with whom it does business. It receives no public funding, enjoys no special statutory powers, and is at liberty to accept or reject residents as it chooses (subject, of course, to anti- discrimination legislation which affects everyone who offers a service to the public) and to charge whatever fees in its commercial judgment it thinks suitable. It is operating in a commercial market with commercial competitors.'

However, he stated at paragraph 28:

'The position might be different if the managers of privately owned care homes enjoyed special statutory powers over residents entitling them to restrain them or to discipline them in some way or to confine them to their rooms or to the care home premises.'

Answer
YL v Birmingham City Council [2007] UKHL 27

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
The most important recent case dealing with the concept of what constitutes the performance of a public function is YL v Birmingham City Council [2007] UKHL 27. This case involved the provision of care and accommodation in privately run care homes for the elderly. In the Court of Appeal, Lord Justice Buxton confirmed that, following Leonard Ch

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1373529836812

Tags
#hra #law #public
Question
The most important recent case dealing with the concept of what constitutes the performance of a public function is YL v Birmingham City Council [2007] UKHL 27. This case involved the provision of care and accommodation in privately run care homes for the elderly. In the Court of Appeal, Lord Justice Buxton confirmed that, following Leonard Cheshire, [...]. The House of Lords, in a 3-2 majority decision, confirmed that the care home was not a functional public authority for the purposes of the HRA 1998. Lord Scott (in the majority) summarised as follows at paragraph 26:

'Southern Cross is a company carrying on a socially useful business for profit. It is neither a charity nor a philanthropist. It enters into private law contracts with the residents in its care homes and with the local authorities with whom it does business. It receives no public funding, enjoys no special statutory powers, and is at liberty to accept or reject residents as it chooses (subject, of course, to anti- discrimination legislation which affects everyone who offers a service to the public) and to charge whatever fees in its commercial judgment it thinks suitable. It is operating in a commercial market with commercial competitors.'

However, he stated at paragraph 28:

'The position might be different if the managers of privately owned care homes enjoyed special statutory powers over residents entitling them to restrain them or to discipline them in some way or to confine them to their rooms or to the care home premises.'

Answer
a private care home, when accommodating the appellants, was not performing the functions of a public authority under the HRA 1998, s 6(3)(b)

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
on is YL v Birmingham City Council [2007] UKHL 27. This case involved the provision of care and accommodation in privately run care homes for the elderly. In the Court of Appeal, Lord Justice Buxton confirmed that, following Leonard Cheshire, <span>a private care home, when accommodating the appellants, was not performing the functions of a public authority under the HRA 1998, s 6(3)(b). The House of Lords, in a 3-2 majority decision, confirmed that the care home was not a functional public authority for the purposes of the HRA 1998. Lord Scott (in the majority) summar

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1373530885388

Tags
#hra #law #public
Question
The most important recent case dealing with the concept of what constitutes the performance of a public function is YL v Birmingham City Council [2007] UKHL 27. This case involved the provision of care and accommodation in privately run care homes for the elderly. In the Court of Appeal, Lord Justice Buxton confirmed that, following Leonard Cheshire, a private care home, when accommodating the appellants, was not performing the functions of a public authority under the HRA 1998, s 6(3)(b). The House of Lords, in a 3-2 majority decision, confirmed that the care home was not a functional public authority for the purposes of the HRA 1998. Lord Scott (in the majority) summarised as follows at paragraph 26:

'Southern Cross is a company [...]. It is neither a charity nor a philanthropist. It enters into private law contracts with the residents in its care homes and with the local authorities with whom it does business. It receives no public funding, enjoys no special statutory powers, and is at liberty to accept or reject residents as it chooses (subject, of course, to anti- discrimination legislation which affects everyone who offers a service to the public) and to charge whatever fees in its commercial judgment it thinks suitable. It is operating in a commercial market with commercial competitors.'

However, he stated at paragraph 28:

'The position might be different if the managers of privately owned care homes enjoyed special statutory powers over residents entitling them to restrain them or to discipline them in some way or to confine them to their rooms or to the care home premises.'

Answer
carrying on a socially useful business for profit

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
s, in a 3-2 majority decision, confirmed that the care home was not a functional public authority for the purposes of the HRA 1998. Lord Scott (in the majority) summarised as follows at paragraph 26: 'Southern Cross is a company <span>carrying on a socially useful business for profit. It is neither a charity nor a philanthropist. It enters into private law contracts with the residents in its care homes and with the local authorities with whom it does business. It re

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1373531933964

Tags
#hra #law #public
Question
The most important recent case dealing with the concept of what constitutes the performance of a public function is YL v Birmingham City Council [2007] UKHL 27. This case involved the provision of care and accommodation in privately run care homes for the elderly. In the Court of Appeal, Lord Justice Buxton confirmed that, following Leonard Cheshire, a private care home, when accommodating the appellants, was not performing the functions of a public authority under the HRA 1998, s 6(3)(b). The House of Lords, in a 3-2 majority decision, confirmed that the care home was not a functional public authority for the purposes of the HRA 1998. Lord Scott (in the majority) summarised as follows at paragraph 26:

'Southern Cross is a company carrying on a socially useful business for profit. It is neither a charity nor a philanthropist. It enters into [...]. It receives no public funding, enjoys no special statutory powers, and is at liberty to accept or reject residents as it chooses (subject, of course, to anti- discrimination legislation which affects everyone who offers a service to the public) and to charge whatever fees in its commercial judgment it thinks suitable. It is operating in a commercial market with commercial competitors.'

However, he stated at paragraph 28:

'The position might be different if the managers of privately owned care homes enjoyed special statutory powers over residents entitling them to restrain them or to discipline them in some way or to confine them to their rooms or to the care home premises.'

Answer
private law contracts with the residents in its care homes and with the local authorities with whom it does business

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
es of the HRA 1998. Lord Scott (in the majority) summarised as follows at paragraph 26: 'Southern Cross is a company carrying on a socially useful business for profit. It is neither a charity nor a philanthropist. It enters into <span>private law contracts with the residents in its care homes and with the local authorities with whom it does business. It receives no public funding, enjoys no special statutory powers, and is at liberty to accept or reject residents as it chooses (subject, of course, to anti- discrimination legislatio

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1373532982540

Tags
#hra #law #public
Question
The most important recent case dealing with the concept of what constitutes the performance of a public function is YL v Birmingham City Council [2007] UKHL 27. This case involved the provision of care and accommodation in privately run care homes for the elderly. In the Court of Appeal, Lord Justice Buxton confirmed that, following Leonard Cheshire, a private care home, when accommodating the appellants, was not performing the functions of a public authority under the HRA 1998, s 6(3)(b). The House of Lords, in a 3-2 majority decision, confirmed that the care home was not a functional public authority for the purposes of the HRA 1998. Lord Scott (in the majority) summarised as follows at paragraph 26:

'Southern Cross is a company carrying on a socially useful business for profit. It is neither a charity nor a philanthropist. It enters into private law contracts with the residents in its care homes and with the local authorities with whom it does business. It receives [...], enjoys no special statutory powers, and is at liberty to accept or reject residents as it chooses (subject, of course, to anti- discrimination legislation which affects everyone who offers a service to the public) and to charge whatever fees in its commercial judgment it thinks suitable. It is operating in a commercial market with commercial competitors.'

However, he stated at paragraph 28:

'The position might be different if the managers of privately owned care homes enjoyed special statutory powers over residents entitling them to restrain them or to discipline them in some way or to confine them to their rooms or to the care home premises.'

Answer
no public funding

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
carrying on a socially useful business for profit. It is neither a charity nor a philanthropist. It enters into private law contracts with the residents in its care homes and with the local authorities with whom it does business. It receives <span>no public funding, enjoys no special statutory powers, and is at liberty to accept or reject residents as it chooses (subject, of course, to anti- discrimination legislation which affects everyone who of

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1373534031116

Tags
#hra #law #public
Question
The most important recent case dealing with the concept of what constitutes the performance of a public function is YL v Birmingham City Council [2007] UKHL 27. This case involved the provision of care and accommodation in privately run care homes for the elderly. In the Court of Appeal, Lord Justice Buxton confirmed that, following Leonard Cheshire, a private care home, when accommodating the appellants, was not performing the functions of a public authority under the HRA 1998, s 6(3)(b). The House of Lords, in a 3-2 majority decision, confirmed that the care home was not a functional public authority for the purposes of the HRA 1998. Lord Scott (in the majority) summarised as follows at paragraph 26:

'Southern Cross is a company carrying on a socially useful business for profit. It is neither a charity nor a philanthropist. It enters into private law contracts with the residents in its care homes and with the local authorities with whom it does business. It receives no public funding, enjoys no [...], and is at liberty to accept or reject residents as it chooses (subject, of course, to anti- discrimination legislation which affects everyone who offers a service to the public) and to charge whatever fees in its commercial judgment it thinks suitable. It is operating in a commercial market with commercial competitors.'

However, he stated at paragraph 28:

'The position might be different if the managers of privately owned care homes enjoyed special statutory powers over residents entitling them to restrain them or to discipline them in some way or to confine them to their rooms or to the care home premises.'

Answer
special statutory powers

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
l business for profit. It is neither a charity nor a philanthropist. It enters into private law contracts with the residents in its care homes and with the local authorities with whom it does business. It receives no public funding, enjoys no <span>special statutory powers, and is at liberty to accept or reject residents as it chooses (subject, of course, to anti- discrimination legislation which affects everyone who offers a service to the public) and to

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1373535079692

Tags
#hra #law #public
Question
The most important recent case dealing with the concept of what constitutes the performance of a public function is YL v Birmingham City Council [2007] UKHL 27. This case involved the provision of care and accommodation in privately run care homes for the elderly. In the Court of Appeal, Lord Justice Buxton confirmed that, following Leonard Cheshire, a private care home, when accommodating the appellants, was not performing the functions of a public authority under the HRA 1998, s 6(3)(b). The House of Lords, in a 3-2 majority decision, confirmed that the care home was not a functional public authority for the purposes of the HRA 1998. Lord Scott (in the majority) summarised as follows at paragraph 26:

'Southern Cross is a company carrying on a socially useful business for profit. It is neither a charity nor a philanthropist. It enters into private law contracts with the residents in its care homes and with the local authorities with whom it does business. It receives no public funding, enjoys no special statutory powers, and is [...] (subject, of course, to anti- discrimination legislation which affects everyone who offers a service to the public) and to charge whatever fees in its commercial judgment it thinks suitable. It is operating in a commercial market with commercial competitors.'

However, he stated at paragraph 28:

'The position might be different if the managers of privately owned care homes enjoyed special statutory powers over residents entitling them to restrain them or to discipline them in some way or to confine them to their rooms or to the care home premises.'

Answer
at liberty to accept or reject residents as it chooses

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
her a charity nor a philanthropist. It enters into private law contracts with the residents in its care homes and with the local authorities with whom it does business. It receives no public funding, enjoys no special statutory powers, and is <span>at liberty to accept or reject residents as it chooses (subject, of course, to anti- discrimination legislation which affects everyone who offers a service to the public) and to charge whatever fees in its commercial judgment it thinks suita

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1373536128268

Tags
#hra #law #public
Question
The most important recent case dealing with the concept of what constitutes the performance of a public function is YL v Birmingham City Council [2007] UKHL 27. This case involved the provision of care and accommodation in privately run care homes for the elderly. In the Court of Appeal, Lord Justice Buxton confirmed that, following Leonard Cheshire, a private care home, when accommodating the appellants, was not performing the functions of a public authority under the HRA 1998, s 6(3)(b). The House of Lords, in a 3-2 majority decision, confirmed that the care home was not a functional public authority for the purposes of the HRA 1998. Lord Scott (in the majority) summarised as follows at paragraph 26:

'Southern Cross is a company carrying on a socially useful business for profit. It is neither a charity nor a philanthropist. It enters into private law contracts with the residents in its care homes and with the local authorities with whom it does business. It receives no public funding, enjoys no special statutory powers, and is at liberty to accept or reject residents as it chooses (subject, of course, to anti- discrimination legislation which affects everyone who offers a service to the public) and to [...]. It is operating in a commercial market with commercial competitors.'

However, he stated at paragraph 28:

'The position might be different if the managers of privately owned care homes enjoyed special statutory powers over residents entitling them to restrain them or to discipline them in some way or to confine them to their rooms or to the care home premises.'

Answer
charge whatever fees in its commercial judgment it thinks suitable

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
es no public funding, enjoys no special statutory powers, and is at liberty to accept or reject residents as it chooses (subject, of course, to anti- discrimination legislation which affects everyone who offers a service to the public) and to <span>charge whatever fees in its commercial judgment it thinks suitable. It is operating in a commercial market with commercial competitors.' However, he stated at paragraph 28: 'The position might be different if the manage

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1373537176844

Tags
#hra #law #public
Question
The most important recent case dealing with the concept of what constitutes the performance of a public function is YL v Birmingham City Council [2007] UKHL 27. This case involved the provision of care and accommodation in privately run care homes for the elderly. In the Court of Appeal, Lord Justice Buxton confirmed that, following Leonard Cheshire, a private care home, when accommodating the appellants, was not performing the functions of a public authority under the HRA 1998, s 6(3)(b). The House of Lords, in a 3-2 majority decision, confirmed that the care home was not a functional public authority for the purposes of the HRA 1998. Lord Scott (in the majority) summarised as follows at paragraph 26:

'Southern Cross is a company carrying on a socially useful business for profit. It is neither a charity nor a philanthropist. It enters into private law contracts with the residents in its care homes and with the local authorities with whom it does business. It receives no public funding, enjoys no special statutory powers, and is at liberty to accept or reject residents as it chooses (subject, of course, to anti- discrimination legislation which affects everyone who offers a service to the public) and to charge whatever fees in its commercial judgment it thinks suitable. It is operating in a commercial market with commercial competitors.'

However, he stated at paragraph 28:

'The position might be different if [...].'

Answer
the managers of privately owned care homes enjoyed special statutory powers over residents entitling them to restrain them or to discipline them in some way or to confine them to their rooms or to the care home premises

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
charge whatever fees in its commercial judgment it thinks suitable. It is operating in a commercial market with commercial competitors.' However, he stated at paragraph 28: 'The position might be different if <span>the managers of privately owned care homes enjoyed special statutory powers over residents entitling them to restrain them or to discipline them in some way or to confine them to their rooms or to the care home premises.' <span><body><html>

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1373538225420

Tags
#hra #law #public
Question
A less restrictive line was taken by the Court of Appeal in the subsequent case of [ case ], where the court determined that the defendant housing association, which was a registered social landlord, was liable under the HRA 1998 (specifically the ECHR, art 8) in respect of their action in terminating the claimant's tenancy. In this case, the Court of Appeal appears to have clarified the law further in respect of hybrid authorities. It stated that if any of the functions that a body performs are public, it will be seen as a hybrid public authority. However, a final very important further proviso applied before liability under the HRA 1998, s 6(1) would apply, namely the nature of the action which the body is carrying out at the relevant time. Here, it stated that the court should ask whether the specific act undertaken by the authority is nevertheless private in nature? If it is, the defendant will be able to rely on the HRA 1998, s 6(5) and will not be subject to liability under the HRA 1998 in relation to this action. However, if the action is considered public in nature, the body will be potentially liable.
Answer
R (Weaver) v London and Quadrant Housing Trust

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
A less restrictive line was taken by the Court of Appeal in the subsequent case of R (Weaver) v London and Quadrant Housing Trust, where the court determined that the defendant housing association, which was a registered social landlord, was liable under the HRA 1998 (specifically the ECHR, art 8) in respect of

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1373540060428

Tags
#hra #law #public
Question
A less restrictive line was taken by the Court of Appeal in the subsequent case of R (Weaver) v London and Quadrant Housing Trust, where the court determined that the defendant housing association, which was a registered social landlord, was liable under the HRA 1998 (specifically the ECHR, art 8) in respect of their action in terminating the claimant's tenancy. In this case, the Court of Appeal appears to have clarified the law further in respect of hybrid authorities. It stated that if [...]. However, a final very important further proviso applied before liability under the HRA 1998, s 6(1) would apply, namely the nature of the action which the body is carrying out at the relevant time. Here, it stated that the court should ask whether the specific act undertaken by the authority is nevertheless private in nature? If it is, the defendant will be able to rely on the HRA 1998, s 6(5) and will not be subject to liability under the HRA 1998 in relation to this action. However, if the action is considered public in nature, the body will be potentially liable.
Answer
any of the functions that a body performs are public, it will be seen as a hybrid public authority

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
the HRA 1998 (specifically the ECHR, art 8) in respect of their action in terminating the claimant's tenancy. In this case, the Court of Appeal appears to have clarified the law further in respect of hybrid authorities. It stated that if <span>any of the functions that a body performs are public, it will be seen as a hybrid public authority. However, a final very important further proviso applied before liability under the HRA 1998, s 6(1) would apply, namely the nature of the action which the body is carrying out at the

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1373541109004

Tags
#hra #law #public
Question
If any of the functions that a body performs are public, it will be seen as a hybrid public authority.
Answer
R (Weaver) v London and Quadrant Housing Trust

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
A less restrictive line was taken by the Court of Appeal in the subsequent case of R (Weaver) v London and Quadrant Housing Trust, where the court determined that the defendant housing association, which was a registered social landlord, was liable under the HRA 1998 (specifically the ECHR, art 8) in respect of

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1373542944012

Tags
#hra #law #public
Question
A less restrictive line was taken by the Court of Appeal in the subsequent case of R (Weaver) v London and Quadrant Housing Trust, where the court determined that the defendant housing association, which was a registered social landlord, was liable under the HRA 1998 (specifically the ECHR, art 8) in respect of their action in terminating the claimant's tenancy. In this case, the Court of Appeal appears to have clarified the law further in respect of hybrid authorities. It stated that if any of the functions that a body performs are public, it will be seen as a hybrid public authority. However, a final very important further proviso applied before liability under the HRA 1998, s 6(1) would apply, namely the nature of the action which the body is carrying out at the relevant time. Here, it stated that the court should ask whether [...]? If it is, the defendant will be able to rely on the HRA 1998, s 6(5) and will not be subject to liability under the HRA 1998 in relation to this action. However, if the action is considered public in nature, the body will be potentially liable.
Answer
the specific act undertaken by the authority is nevertheless private in nature

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
, a final very important further proviso applied before liability under the HRA 1998, s 6(1) would apply, namely the nature of the action which the body is carrying out at the relevant time. Here, it stated that the court should ask whether <span>the specific act undertaken by the authority is nevertheless private in nature? If it is, the defendant will be able to rely on the HRA 1998, s 6(5) and will not be subject to liability under the HRA 1998 in relation to this action. However, if the action is con

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1373543992588

Tags
#hra #law #public
Question
The doctrine of the margin of appreciation used by the Strasbourg court to interpret ECHR rights is not strictly applicable in the domestic context. In [ case ], the House of Lords considered the role of the margin of appreciation in UK domestic law. Lord Hope stated:

'… The doctrine of the "margin of appreciation" is a familiar part of the jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights … By conceding a margin of appreciation to each national system, the Court has recognised that the Convention, as a living system, does not need to be applied uniformly by all states but may vary in its application according to local needs and conditions. This technique is not available to the national courts when they are considering Convention issues arising within their own countries. But in the hands of national courts also the Convention should be seen as an expression of fundamental principles rather than a set of mere rules. Questions which the courts will have to decide in the application of these principles will involve questions of balance between competing interests and issues of proportionality. In this area, difficult choices may have to be made by the executive or the legislature between the rights of the individual and the needs of society. In some circumstances it will be appropriate for the courts to recognise that there is an area of judgment within which the judiciary will defer, on democratic grounds, to the considered opinion of the elected body or person whose act or decision is said to be incompatible with the Convention ... It will be easier for such an area of judgment to be recognised where the Convention itself requires a balance to be struck, much less so where the right is stated in terms which are unqualified. It will be easier for it to be recognised where the issues involve questions of social or economic policy, much less so where the rights are of high constitutional importance or are of a kind where the courts are especially well placed to assess the need for protection.' (Emphasis added.)

Answer
R v Director of Public Prosecutions, ex parte Kebilene [2000] HRLR 93

statusnot learned