The Importance Of Freedom Of Expression In Democracy

The Importance Of Freedom Of Expression In Democracy
Springer went to the European Court of Human Rights, and claimed that Germany violated its right to freedom of expression. Germany and Springer
agreed that
Springer's freedom of expression was interfered with, that the interference was prescribed by law, and that the aim of the interference was legitimate:
protecting the reputation and privacy of the actor. But the parties disagreed on whether the interference with freedom of expression was 'necessary in a
democratic society' (see
Article 10(2) of the European Convention on Human Rights).
The European Court of Human Rights confirms, as a general principle, that freedom of expression is essential for democracy:
Freedom of expression constitutes one of the essential foundations of a democratic society and one of the basic conditions for its progress and for each
individual's selffulfilment.
Subject to paragraph 2 of Article 10, it is applicable not only to 'information' or 'ideas' that are favourably received or regarded as inoffensive or as a
matter of indifference, but also to those that offend, shock or disturb.
Such are the demands of pluralism, tolerance and broadmindedness without which there is no 'democratic society'. As set forth in Article 10, freedom
of expression is subject to exceptions, which must, however, be construed The European Court of Human Rights reaffirms that freedom of expression
can be limited in view of the rights of others, such as privacy. The court agrees with the
German courts' assessment that
... Get more on HelpWriting.net ...

The Human Rights Act And The United Kingdom Of Great Britain
any scholars have argued that the introduction of the Human Rights Act has fostered a change in the constitutional order, and that parliamentary
sovereignty is no longer the main basis of the British Constitution. In order to assess whether the introduction of the Human Rights Act 1998 fostered a
change in the constitutional order and that parliamentary sovereignty is no longer the main basis of the British constitution it is first necessary to
understand the British constitution. This essay will analyse the term constitution and its principles, the effects the Humans Rights Act and the
European Communities Act had on the Uk Constitution and ultimately explain parliamentary sovereignty and why it is no longer the main basis of the
British... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
The limitation of power exists so that exercise of power must conform to notions of respect for individuals and individual rights. Introducing the
rule of law, according to Dicey the rule of law has three meanings (a) the supremacy of regular law over arbitrary power (b) equality before the law
and (c) no higher law other than the rights of individuals as determined through the courts (Dicey, 1885). When the government is answerable to the
law, the court are empowered to make the authoritative determination of what the law is. Laws must be clear, for example in the case of the Burmal
Oil Co Ltd v Lord Advocate [1965] the House of Lords upheld the claim for compensation against the crown in respect of damage done by British
forces during wartime. It was seen as incompatible with the rule of law and caused the War Damage Act 1965. Control over the discretionary power is
essential. Since the British Constitution is un–codified and the rights and duties of citizens are not expressly codified in one central document. The
classical British view of rights is that individuals were free to do anything that was not prohibited, the Human Rights Act fostered a change in the
constitutional order, as it incorporated the European Convention on the Protection of Human Rights 1951 [ECHR] into the domestic law of the United
Kingdom. The separation of powers is a model of government that many

Irish family law has been formulated around the concept of...
Irish family law has been formulated around the concept of the family as a married heterosexual couple who conceive children within wedlock. This
has resulted in the non–marital family not enjoying the full protections of the law. It has only been in the last decade that these families have started to
be included in Irish law. It is interesting to examine this development in light of the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR). Indeed, up until the
late 1980s, there was no legal recognition of same–sex relationships in any of the European jurisdictions. While marriage is becoming increasingly
available for same–sex couples in Europe, there still remain many jurisdictions where there is no legal recognition. This essay seeks to examine ... Show
more content on Helpwriting.net ...
The following two cases were taken against Ireland and therefore directly affect Irish family law. In the case of Johnston v Ireland, the court held that
family life existed where a non–married heterosexual couple had lived together for 15 years. In Keegan v Ireland, the applicant challenged the Irish
adoption law that allowed an unmarried mother to place her child for adoption, without the consent of the father. The applicant argued this treatment of
non–marital fathers violated article 6, the right to fair trial, and article 8 of the ECHR. The Court held in favour of the applicant and found that when
an unmarried couple are living together, a child born in that relationship is part of the family unit, which will continue if the parents no longer live
together.
Same–sex relationships have been commonly litigated in the ECtHR on two grounds, article 14 and article 8 of the ECHR. In Bensaid v United
Kingdom , the Court held that sexual orientation and sexual life were protected under article 8 as part of private life. Litigants relied on article 14,
which prohibits discrimination on the ground of a person characteristic, on specific issues such as succession to tenancies. While this article does not
explicitly include sexual orientation, the Court applied this strictly to sexual orientation in Dudgeon v United Kingdom. The Court held that
"particularly serious reasons" were required to justify a difference in treatment based on sexual

What Is A Hearsay Statement?
A hearsay statement is admitted when there is also any admissible evidence that would have been admissible to attack the credibility of the maker of
the statement if they had given oral evidence. In R v Horncastle , the opposing party is enabled to put in evidence which he could have put in if the
witness had been present, but may also put in material which, if the witness had been present, could only have been asked of him in cross examination
in circumstances where his answers would have been final; this puts the challenger to that extent in a better position than if the witness is present, and
is designed to help to counterbalance the absence of cross–examination of the witness in person.
Section 125(1)
Section 125(1) , places a duty on the crown court to stop a case and either direct the jury trial to acquit the defendant, or discharge the jury, if the case
against him or her is wholly or partly an out of court statement that is so convincing that, considering its importance to the case, a conviction would be
unsafe.
Section 126 ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Section 126(1) provides a further discretion to exclude a hearsay statement if it would result in undue waste of time, substantially outweighs the case for
admitting it, taking account of the value of the evidence. The provision preserves both the existing common law power for the court to exclude
evidence where its prejudicial effect is out of proportion to its probative value and the discretion in Section 78 of PACE in relation to the admission of
unfair evidence

Human Rights Law Is No Assistance For Dealing With...
LAND LAW ASSESSEMENT 2
STUDENT : 13003135
TUTOR : Sarah Keenan LLB YEAR 2
word count excluding bibliography 3661
'Human rights law is of no assistance in dealing with homelessness.' Discuss STUDENT: 13003135
'Human rights law is of no assistance in dealing with homelessness.' Discuss
HOME SWEET HOME
"The labour of his body, and the work of his hands, we may say, are properly his."
Introduction
Even though it has been argued that Human rights is of little assistance in dealing with
homelessness, this essay will argue that human rights have marginally opened the gateway
for a defense in homelessness cases. This essay will do this by looking at Article 8 and ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
The main purpose of the ECHR which being a product of post–war Europe was to promote
and expand the freedoms that are today considered paramount to human life in society.
It is a requirement that domestic legislation is compatible with the European Convention of
Human Rights. The bulk of these rights were engaged and incorporated into the ECHR, however the right to property was not agreed to until 1954
. It has so far been included in a separate protocol, although the ECHR was incorporated into domestic law by the HRA 1998, the rights are not to

far from that of those that go back to the traditional principles founded for many centuries. This is firmly stated by Professor C.B. Macphearson
where by he tells us that the idea of property is expanded, 'right to a kind of society or set of power relations which will enable the individual to live a
fully human life. ' looking back to older property philosophy according to John Locke the concept of property was seen to be embracing of a persons
'life, liberty and estate, the essay will go onto link this theory at the end of the essay.
Article 1 of the first protocol can be shown to include the principle that no one shall be deprived of their property, this has been an emblem in
democratic government. The attachment of the home can be seen to emanate from article 8, which reflects that a person has
a

The Pros And Cons Of Extradition
Extradition is the transfer of an accused from one state or country to another state or country that seeks to place the accused on trial. In legal term
extradition can be defined as the legal surrender of a fugitive to the jurisdiction of another state, country, or government for trial. Extradition between
nations is regulated by extradition laws or diplomatic treaties between the country where the accused is present. Not all the countries have extradition
treaties. The united states have entered into extradition treaties with many countries in Europe and Latin America and few countries in Asia and Africa.
Extradition treaty is necessary because once a person leaves the border of a country the laws of that country cease to apply to them and ... Show more
content on Helpwriting.net ...
Many of the extradition treaties which has been signed by the U.S requires that the offense should be a crime in the U.S as well as the country making
the request. In U.S requests for extradition are seen by the state department and the justice department. The limitations to extradition are as follows:–
–Not all the nations will extradite their citizens to another country for prosecution like France and Israel.
–There are countries which refuses to extradite to the U.S if the death penalty will be imposed. There are treaties which have the provisions that
prevent extradition if the person has already been convicted oe acquitted for the crime.
The European Convention on Extradition was signed on December 13th 1957. The European Convention on Extradition convention is a multilateral
extradition treaty. Extradition can only be granted with respect to certain crimes. France, Japan, Ukraine, China, Belarus are the countries which do not
have its citizens extradited.
The Extradition Clause or Interstate Rendition Clause of the United States Constitution refers to the Article 4, Section 2, Clause 2, which provides for
the extradition of a criminal back to the state where he/she has committed a

The Main Sources Of English And Welsh Law
United Kingdom gets constituted by four countries: the England, Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland. There is no single arrangement of reports
that contains the entire of the law of the UK. Moreover, UK law is likewise not classified, that brings a level of conviction to the law as it permits
nationals to recognize plainly whether something is unlawful and the examination methodology that it will create. Absence of codification prompts the
legitimate framework being firm as innovative improvements go before past that which the lawmakers thought. Despite its flaws and solidness, the
English basic law, as an agent of the normal law of the UK, is a standout amongst the most productive ones. All states need to embrace the same or
somewhat changed legitimate framework. Some law applies all through the entire of the UK; a few applies in a few countries. The four main sources
of English and Welsh law are legislation or statutory, common or case law, European Convention on theHuman Rights and European Union law.
Body
1)Statutory
The primary source of law for the UK is statutory or legislation, which is the law passed by Parliament. Essential law will come into power after
level headed discussion and consequent approbation in the House of Commons. It will then undergo support in the House of Lords and will then get
Royal Assent in the event that it is to end up law. Secondary enactment is law made outside of Parliament where the ability to make law has formerly
been allowed by

Questions On Letters From Leeds Bradford Airport
Orla Fellows
Research Trail
Relevant Facts
1.Orla Fellows flight from Leeds to Aberdeen was cancelled
2.She posted a tweet on social media website 'Twitter,' whilst upset about the delay and inconvenience caused by Leeds Bradford Airport
3.A week later she was arrested at work due to a report against her by the general manager of Leeds Bradford airport on reading her tweet:
"#LeedsBradfordAirport, what a joke! Due to use this route again in a month – if this happens next time I'm blowing the airport sky high!"
4.She was arrested at work by West Yorkshire Police on suspicion of involvement in a bomb hoax.
5.The arresting officer informed her that her tweet had been reported by the general manager of Leeds Bradford Airport ... Show more content on
Helpwriting.net ...
and Vick, D.W. The Communications Act 2003: A New Regulatory Framework in the UK. Convergence: The International Journal of Research into
New Media Technologies, 11(3), 2005, pp.75–94
Helfer, L.R., Redesigning the European Court of Human Rights: embeddedness as a deep structural principle of the European human rights regime.
European Journal of International Law, 19(1), 2008, .pp.125–159
Memorandum
To: Supervisor
From: Trainee Solicitor
Date:1 May 2016

Re: Orla Fellows
Further to your memorandum dated 21 April 2016 I have carried out the research requested.
Summary
Orla can rely on Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights and her Defence is strong to dissolve the case brought by the prosecution
against her.
Orla has been arrested under the charge of section 1 of the Malicious Communications Act 1988 or under section 127 of the Communications Act 2003.
These refer to the communications that are determined to be a threat, false, offensive and indecent or of menacing character.
Section 127 of the Communications Act 2003 provides that on summary conviction the offence holds imprisonment for up to six months or a fine not
exceeding ВЈ5000 or both. Section 32 of the Criminal Justice and Courts Act 2015 revised segment 1 expanded the greatest penalty to 2 years '
imprisonment.
Results of Research
Under Article 10 of the European

The Human Rights Act of 1998 and Its Judicial Impact
The Human Rights Act of 1998 and its judicial impact In spite of the fact that there is much controversy when regarding human rights and the degree
to which the authorities are determined to get actively involved in stopping significant crimes from being committed, its components basically
remained the same. The European Court of Human Rights has the authority to determine the outcome of a trial involving a violation of human
rights and all judges coming across such a case need to take into consideration the court's decision. The Court of Appeal is limited in dealing with a
situation where a decision made by the European Court of Human Rights conflicts with precedents issued by the House of Lords. Even with this, all
that needs to be done in such circumstances is for judges to simply take into account the European Court of Human Rights' decision, as they do not
actually have to act on account of the concepts that it contained. The doctrine of precedent plays a very important role in English courts as a
consequence of the fact that common law largely dominates lawmaking in the UK. This doctrine relates to how judges need to consider previous
cases while working on a present case with the purpose of putting across a verdict that is as accurate as possible (this is a consequence of the fact that
previous cases have been dealt with utmost professionalism and are thus important sources of inspiration). However, when considering the Human
Rights Act of 1998, conditions were

Parliamentary Sovereignty
"It remains a first principle of our constitutional law that Parliament in enacting primary legislation is sovereign. Parliamentary sovereignty has been
qualified though not departed from in different ways by our adoption of the law of the European Union through the European Communities Act 1972
and by the Human Rights Act 1998."
Per Lord Justice Laws, R (MISICK) v Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs [2010] EWCA Civ 1549
Evaluate this statement with reference to appropriate legal authorities.
In order to evaluate this statement it is important to understand what Parliamentary sovereignty is and how it relates to European Union law with the
enactment of the European Communities Act 1972 and the Human Rights Act... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
"If the supremacy within the European Community of Community law over the national law of member states was not always inherent in the EEC
Treaty it was certainly well established in the jurisprudence of the Court of Justice long before the United Kingdom joined the Community. Thus,
whatever limitation of its sovereignty Parliament accepted when it enacted the European Communities Act 1972 was entirely voluntary."
European Union Law challenges the concept of Parliamentary Sovereignty. The European Union also has the doctrine of supremacy which means all
member states must adhere to European Union laws as opposed to their own national laws. This may have restrained Parliamentary Sovereignty in the
UK upon its entry to the European Union in 1972. In order to comply with the European Court of Justice the UK Parliament enacted the European
Communities Act 1972 and the Human Rights Act 1998.
Lord Denning stated that signing the treaty was only the first step as Community law could not be implemented merely by signing a Treaty of
Accession. Parliament passed the European Community Act 1972, which came into force on 1st January 1973, whereby Community law become
applicable

The European Convention On Human Rights
– Anything that is italicized needs to be rewritten
The European Convention on Human Rights. Exactly what is it and what are its aims? Its an international treaty which only member States of the
Council of Europe may sign. The Convention lays a basic groundwork of all rights and guarantees which the States have to be held to. These rights
include the freedom of though, expression, conscience, religion, effective remedy, peace enjoyment of possessions, and the right to vote and to stand
for election. However, there are some limitations within these rights that need mentioning: Qualified, Absolute and Limited Rights. Absolute rights
refer to the prohibition torture and inhuman and degrading treatment (Article 3). The State can never withhold or take away these rights. Limited
rights, such as the right to liberty (article 5) may be limited under explicit and finite circumstances. Qualified rights are those which require a balance
between the rights of the individual and the needs of the wider community or state interest. These include the right to respect for private and family
life (article 8), to manifest one's religion or beliefs (Article 9), expression (Article 10), freedom of assembly and associations (article 11), the right to
peaceful enjoyment of property (protocol 1, article 1), and to some extent, the right to education (protocol 1 Article 2)
The Council of Europe is a regional intergovernmental organization which promotes human rights, democracy, and in the rule of

Parliamentary Sovereignty Essay
Is the orthodox view of parliamentary sovereignty still relevant in the modern British constitution? Why (not)?
1.The orthodox view of parliamentary sovereignty
To define parliamentary sovereignty does not seem too complicated when it is assessed in isolation. Only in connection with other constitutional
principles difficult tensions arise. The orthodox view of parliamentary sovereignty is simply that only parliament has the right to make or unmake law
and that no other institution can challenge that right. This also includes the rule that parliament cannot bind its successors. Parliament can follow its
own procedural rules as it wishes and court cannot examine the procedure by which legislation has been passed (enrolled bill rule). ... Show more
A majority of judges even said obiter that Parliament could not extend its lifetime beyond five years, even if the 1911 Act was to be expressly repealed
and the extension bill then passed. That leads to the question if there are basic constitutional rules that parliament simply cannot change. Lord Steyn
and Lord Woolf held that the courts might have to revisit the principle of parliamentary sovereignty, if Parliament sought 'to abolish judicial review of
flagrant abuse of power by government or even the role of the ordinary courts in standing between the executive and citizens'. In such an event, the
court might have to 'qualify' the supremacy of Parliament, 'a principle established on a different hypothesis of constitutionalism'.
3.EC Act 1972
The biggest challenge for parliamentary sovereignty clearly comes from the implications of the 1972 EC Act. Section 2 of the EC Act obliges the
UK courts to give effect to Union law. That does not mean that the British courts have the power to strike down legislation but they have the power
to set aside British law in a particular case and apply Union law instead. Tensions arose in the past in a number of cases in which Westminster
legislated against Union law. Good examples of it are the Factortame cases in which Parliament finally had to accept the supremacy of EU (then EC)
law. However, the question of whether the traditional rule that no parliament can bind its successors is still valid was not expressly answered

The Human Rights Act 1998
The Human Rights Act 1998 was fully enforced in 2000 and describes further effect to freedoms and rights that are entitled under the ECHR (the
European Convention on Human Rights) (Ward, Wragg & Walker 2011, p. 146). The constitutional framework of the United Kingdom implies that the
Human Rights Act 1998 is not 'embedded' in the same way as the human rights papers that are adopted by many nations in the world. Nonetheless, it is
argued that any attempt to amend or repeal the provisions of the Human Right Act 1998's would necessitate the clearest probable words. It is significant
to note that the scheme of the Human Rights Act is complicated, as it requires public authorities to undertake their functions in compatible with the
ECHR, and it provides the Convention and related jurisprudence with an important influence over the domestic law interpretation (Ward, Wragg &
Walker 2011, p. 147). Conversely, it impedes the courts from invalidating incompatible Parliament's Act and in this respect; it does not provide the
Convention with a primacy over domestic law. This paper seeks to evaluate the degree to which the Human Rights Act 1998 has fully incorporated the
ECHR into the United Kingdom's legal system.
ECHR
The creation of ECHR can be traced back to 1950 after the formation of the United Nations. As a war–shattered continent, Europe was determined to
create a 'free Europe' by developing a human rights document enshrining human rights and ardent

Parliamentary Sovereignty In The Uk Essay
In this essay I will explain how the United Kingdom's (UK) membership in the European Union (EU) and how the enactment of the Human Rights Act
1988 (HRA) has diminished parliament's sovereignty. I do however make it clear that it is important to note that in theory the UK still holds some
sovereignty over the EU and the European Convention of Human Rights (ECtHR) as in theory they can withdraw from both institutions. Also the
pledged referendum to leave the EU and the possibility of a new Bill of Rights will affect the future of parliamentary sovereignty. A.V. Dicey's
explanation of Parliamentary Sovereignty is used as the foundation for discussion; Dicey outlines the traditional doctrine of parliamentary sovereignty
which consist of three ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
The UK's Merchant Shipping Act 1988 conflicted with EU law as it prevented Spanish fishermen from using UK waters; as a consequence, after much
litigation, the Merchant Shipping Act had to be set aside to give precedent to European Law. An important question that is raised from the case is to
ask whether Parliament is still sovereign because they had to change a UK legislation, which essentially undermines the constitution. Dicey's
perspective on sovereignty that 'no person or body is recognised by the law of England as having a right to override of set aside legislation of
Parliament ' is weakened because the EU forced the UK to set aside its own legislation. As Nicol put it – the case of Factortame results in "the
dismantling of parliamentary sovereignty " clearly emphasises the radical impact that the case had on the UK constitution. The Factortame case clearly
put Parliamentary sovereignty under severe threat, as Parliament falls weakly to the knee to the EU's authority when they overrode Parliament's
Merchant Shipping Act and deem it incompatible. It is clear that the EU have the upper hand when it comes to an issue of incompatible legislation.
Erika M. Szyszczak champions the view that UK gave up sovereign rights by bowing down to the EU's supremacy as they expressed that the judgment
declared in Factortame "brought with it concern that the ultimate bastion of sovereignty, the supremacy of Parliament, had finally been breached ". The
idea that the EU has dethroned Parliament, making them the higher legal authority, is confirmed by Carroll to which that 'the legislative sovereignty of
the United Kingdom has been sublimated for to long

West Hendon Regeneration Scheme
The London Borough of Barnet Council sought to acquire the subject land, and the new rights over it, in order to facilitate the regeneration of the West
Hendon Estate and its immediate surroundings. The scheme aims to provide; up to 2,000 residential dwellings, a new primary school, a community
facility, commercial units, and improved infrastructure in the area. The proposal is intended to provide significant social, economic and environmental
improvements for existing residents (The London Borough of Barnet Council, 2014). It is to be delivered by Barratt Metropolitan LLP, a partnership of
Barratt London and Metropolitan Housing Trust, forming part of the wider Brent Cross–Cricklewood regeneration area, although being progressed
independently.
The WestHendon regeneration scheme was identified in 2001 when the Decent Homes programme required local authorities to offer residents a certain
standard of housing. The West Hendon estate failed to meet these standards, and after consideration of options, it was agreed that regeneration would
be the best way to achieve these. The Council's Core Strategy designates the Estate as one of the Priority Housing Estates, requiring redevelopment and
regeneration to meet these Decent Homes Standards, with the proposal ultimately resulting in the complete demolition of existing buildings within the
Estate. The required area of land was defined and referenced as to land ownership and occupation. The scheme has been split into development

The Proposed British Bill Of Rights (ECHR)
Introduction
The Proposed British Bill of Rights is a proposal from the Conservative Government that was included in their 2015 election manifesto. The main
purpose of the proposal was to aim to replace the Human Rights Act 1998 with a new piece of primary legislation.
After winning the majority of the 2015 general elections, Conservative party leader, now Prime Minister David Cameron, reintroduced the British Bill
of Rights. He initially proposed these plans in the 2010 general elections, but as the Liberal Democrats did not agree to it, and since they had just
formed a coalition, David Cameron did not follow through with the plans. The proposed plans have created tensions between the political right and the
ECtHR (European Court of Human ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
In British law, you cannot set aside the merchant shipping act and the British court doesn't have the power to issue an injunction against the crown. The
ECJ's decision was to set aside any law against the crown. The house of lords had thus decided that they have accepted that the European Community
law is supreme. Thus, this limits the parliament sovereignty. On that note, technically, the latter merchant shipping act should take precedence,
however it didn't, suggesting that the earlier parliament binds the current parliament. This, therefore challenges the doctrine of Parliamentary
sovereignty.
Lord Bridge had stated, "Fishing vessels previously registered as British under the Act of 1894 require to be re–registered under the Act of 1988,
subject to a transitional period prescribed by the Regulations of 1988 which permitted their previous registration to continue in force until 31 March
1989". My opinion on this matter is that, by passing the 1988 act, Parliament has thus been bind by it's predecessor. Also, they bind their successors as
well, from rescinding the aforementioned act. It was one of Dicey's theories that states that Parliament cannot bind it's successor.
Breach of human

The Ecj 's Evolving Case Law On Fundamental Human Rights
Student i.d. 15035030
Words
Question 5
The ECJ has been accused of "not taking (human) rights seriously". Assess the validity of this comment with reference to the ECJ's evolving case law
on fundamental human rights in European Union law.
Introduction:
To begin with, it is essential to explain what is European Court of Justice and Human Rights. The Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) is an
institution, established in 1952, which interprets EU law to make sure it is applied in the same way in all EU countries, and settles legal disputes
between national governments and EU institutions. It can also, in certain circumstances, be used by individuals, companies or organisations to take
action against an EU institution, if they ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
First cases to consider would be Friedrich Stork & Cie v High Authority of the European Coal and Steel Community and Geitling v High Authority ,
where a reluctance to recognise fundamental rights was noticed. However, these were the first cases dealing with fundamental human rights, and
European Court of Justice had plenty of time to progress in making decisions regarding these rights, European Union law and Member States'
national law. Another essential case in this argument is Costa v Enel , where the principle of the supremacy of EEC law over inconsistent national
law was established. In this case European Court of Justice said: " It follows from all these observations that the law stemming from the treaty, an
independent source of law, could not, because of its special and original nature, be overridden by domestic legal provisions, however framed, without
being deprived of its character as community law and without the legal basis of the community itself being called into question", which obviously
gives priority for EU law over national law. Such a decision reflected in application of fundamental Human Rights as well – it proved that Human
Rights will be applicable even if they conflict with national law. Only in Stauder v City of Ulm (An European Union scheme provided cheap butter
for welfare benefits, but required to show a coupon with a person's name and

Why European Law ( Eu And Echr ) Has An Impact On The Uk
Better off out or in?
Gaining an insight on How and Why European Law (EU and ECHR) has an impact on the UK can be challenging. Before overcoming this obstacle it
is advised to acquire basic knowledge on the founding treaties and those currently in force. The sources of law and their effect will analyse, whether
the UK should remain a part of the European Union or not.
The end of WW2 resulted in the creation of an intergovernmental organization The United Nation, promoting Peace and Human Rights. In 1946, the
British Prime Minister Winston Churchill announced 'we must build a kind of United States of Europe'. Those actions undoubtedly sparked a new
sense of enthusiasm across Europe and demonstrates Britain 's influence on the community. In 1948 Britain,France,Belgium, the Netherlands and
Luxembourg creating a unified defence alliance after signing the Brussels Treaty and the UN adopted the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. An
unclear soviet strategy boosted the desire to strengthen military alliances and led towards the establishment of the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation
in 1949 The Council of Europe, was founded in 1949 to provide advice and promote legal standards, human rights, democratic development, the rule of
law and cultural co–operation. Influenced by the UDHR the CoE drafted the European Convention on Human Rights in 1950 and advised on the
creation of the European Court of Human Rights. The Treaty of Rome in 1957 established the European Economic

The Power Of Separation Of Powers Of The ECHR
The European Convention of Human Rights (ECHR), outlines the various rights of citizens in European nations, giving explicit power to the European
courts (ECtHR), as well as domestic courts, with regard to the violation of these rights in the member states of the European Union. One thing to note is
that the ECHR cannot be enacted without referring to the Human Rights Act (HRA) of 1998, which was inspired by the Universal Declaration of
Human Rights (UDHR) at Geneva in 1948. The aim of this essay is to therefore to discuss how the powers are distributed particularly between the
executive (ministers and cabinet) and the judiciary by the Human Rights Act, whether the element of separation of powers is hindered in this event, and
to ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
This thus highlights that the event of the HRA being introduced into the UK constitution as a constitutional convention is necessary in the protection
of human rights of its citizens. It is good to take note of the fact that the HRA, a fall out of the Human Rights Convention of 1953, was majorly
enacted in order to enhance human life, as well as respect the inherent freedom of man. The essence of this act, and if truly the derogation of power
through this act to the different arms of government compromises separation of power as well as the independence of the judiciary would be discussed
in the course of this essay.
It should be noted most importantly also, that the introduction of the HRA via the ECHR incorporated parts of the EU law into the UK law, and
O'Cinneide further suggests that the international relationship enjoyed by the UK with the Council of Europe and the ECHR is directly within the scope
and nature of these reserved powers (outlined in the ECHR). Moreover, Section 6(3)(a) clearly states the courts and tribunals to be public authorities,
going further to sub–paragraph (b), giving the function of a public authority also to 'any person certain of whose functions are functions of public
nature' such as the executives. In addition to this also, the powers of

Eu and the Fundamental Rights..
The European Community (EC) has expressed through treaty provision and case law that the protection of the fundamental rights of EC citizens is
vitally important. However, the EC itself is not currently bound to a set of agreed fundamental rights. For years, the European Court of Justice (ECJ)
has respected and protected fundamental rights by considering the position of state constitutions and the terms of the European Convention on Human
Rights (ECHR). Yet, the ECJ is not bound to follow these. It is not bound to the ECHR, as it is not a signatory.
In 1999, when the member states of the EC also drew up the European Union Charter of Fundamental Rights as part of the new constitution. However
the documents have not been formally ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
But, given the ECJ's long–standing use of the ECHR, the Charter will have a weaker influence.
With the current political situation with regard to the Charter it is unlikely that it will be given legal effect in their current state and the ECJ may feel
reluctant to use the Charter should it give effect to rights that may later be left out of the final document. Furthermore, giving the EC and the ECJ
more power in more areas is an idea that many member states are sceptical of, and this may delay and even prevent the legal status of the treaty from
ever becoming. Given all these facts it is therefore fair to assume the Charter is currently an unnecessary document.
The introduction of the Charter does however raise questions of how the relationships of the Luxembourg and Strasbourg courts may be affected. The
current position of the courts, as described by academic, S Douglas Scott , is "a symbiotic interaction...working out a solution to the sometimes
awkward co–existence of the EU and ECHR". The ECJ and Strasbourg courts make reference to the others law but on a limited basis as to avoid
conflict.
As has already been seen, the ECJ frequently examines the terms and protections of the ECHR when considering issues of fundamental rights in cases
before it. As for the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg, it has previously had little to do with the ECJ, especially due to its more specific
nature. However, with the influx

The European Court Of Human Rights
and the European Court of Human Rights has "entered a few judgments holding that schools have been illegally segregated." Yet despite UNESCO's
attempts to aid Gypsy children, Fletcher believes that the European government is not trying hard enough, since "no European or national judicial or
administrative organ has ordered the cessation of segregation in any school, nor have they addressed the principal means of evasion, white flight.
Instead, they have left corrective action to uncoordinated, unconstrained municipalities" (Fletcher 919). Therefore, a small step for European
governments to take is to implement anti–bullying programs in schools starting in the younger grades. Additionally, they should promote an overall
atmosphere of acceptance in their countries, as a method of demonstrating that as a developed continent, they have the means of helping the Gypsies
and these must be used. By promoting equality among the population, less bullying will be tolerated and Gypsy children will be more comfortable
going to school and becoming healthy citizens. Moreover, adult Gypsy citizens who seek an education to gain qualifications for getting a job, should
also be granted access to education. With a more educated population, Gypsies will be able to contribute to their nation's economy and break free from
a life of plagued by poverty, unemployment, and crime.
Crime is one of the first things people relate Gypsies with; pick pocketing, theft and other petty crimes define their way

The Impact Of Human Rights Act 1998
Impact and Validity of Human Rights Act 1998: A Critical Analysis
The Human Rights Act 1998 was introduced to 'bring rights home' by the labour party in their general election manifesto in 1997 whereby
conventions from ECHR were incorporated in the UK domestic law. The act came in full action in October 2000. It was designed to integrate a
traditional civil liberties approach to safeguard "effective political democracy", from the strong customs of freedom and liberty in the United Kingdom.
In my research I shall at first survey at UK's position in the context of ECHR before HRA 1998 was introduced and then I shall focus on the
development of HRA 1998 in the UK. Here the various articles and sections of HRA 1998 will be discussed in reference with number case laws.
Finally I shall look into the current status of the Act where I'll draw arguments of academics as well as political parties.
As one of the founding member of the European Council, formed in 1953, United Kingdom was entitled to incorporate the European Conventions on
Human Rights into the state's domestic law. Undoubtedly, theEuropean Convention on Human Rights (hereafter ECHR) is one of the foremost
achievements in European legal history and the topmost achievement of the Council of Europe. The emergence of the authority of the European Court
of Human Rights has been defined as one of the most notable occurrences in the history of international law. Its predominance in the area of human
rights standards is also

The Protection Of The European Union Essay
The protection afforded to the individual in United Kingdom by the European Union
Since the United Kingdom became a member of the European Union in 1973, former known as the European Economic Community, a big variety of
changes in the legislation procedures relating to the custom duties, economy, free movement, and social security appeared.
After the two World Wars the European countries started to unite themselves, the main aim being to end the frequent wars and secure peace between
the nations. In 1950 the European Coal and Steam community started to unify politically and economically the European countries for the purpose of
bringing lasting peace.
The Treaty of Rome signed in 1957 brings into being the European Economic Community. The founders of the European Economic Community are
France, Germany Italy, Luxembourg, Belgium and Netherlands. In 1973 United Kingdom, Denmark and Ireland joined the European Economic
Community.
After the collapse of the communism in 1990, the Europe countries grew closer and in 1993 four freedoms were introduce in the Community; the
freedom of movement of goods, immigration money and services between the member states.
In 1993 the Maastricht Treaty came into force to unify the forward movement made during those years, and have new reforms implemented. The main
aim of it was to strengthen the bond between the countries, economically and politically. This formed the European Union as we know it today.
In 1999 Treaty of Amsterdam brought a

The European Convention Of Human Rights
The European Convention of Human Rights (ECHR) can be defined as an international agreement initiated within the Council of Europe, which
was established in 1949 in Strasbourg in France in order to unify Europe after the Second World War (Harries et al., 2014; O 'Boyle, 2014).
According to Donald et al., (2012), United Kingdom was among the first countries to adopt and has played an important role in ECHR creation at
that time. In 1966, the petition and jurisdiction of UK's citizens was voluntary and individuals was able to take a case and jurisdictions to the
ECtHR in Strasbourg. Latterly, in 1998 this process become compulsory for all countries that are members of the (ECHR). Since that time,
European countries has become covered under this agreement as a form of legal system in the unify area. However, it could be argued that the UK
has the least number of cases in the ECtHR in Strasbourg. O 'Boyle (2014. P. 15) stated that "The UK has a very low 'rate of defeat' at Strasbourg. Of
the nearly 12,000 applications brought against the UK between 1999 and 2010, the vast majority fell at the first hurdle". Further they stated that, "Only
three per cent (390 applications) were declared admissible. An even smaller proportion of applications – 1.8 per cent (215) – eventually resulted in a
judgment finding a violation", which in terms means that the UK has lost only 1 out of 50 of the cases that took place in the UK. Thus, some one
could argue and question the extant that this

The European Court Of Human Rights
It is established that the UK does not have a single, written and codified constitution that encompasses ground rules on how it should be governed. The
first part of this essay outlines the movement of the United Kingdom towards legal constitutionalism which then brings to the consideration of the need
for judicial diversity in the second part. To make this argument, this paper analyses the influence of the European Court ofHuman Rights (ECHR) and
European Union (EU) law including domestic laws onto the dilution of political elements in the UK; thus transitioning towards a legal constitution.
Before the 1970s, Dicey's view that 'no person or body is recognised by the law of England as having a right to override or set aside the ... Show more
However, the incorporation of legal constitutionalism prove the increasing need for this reform in order to prevent the state's powers from being
ultra vires. The legal approach is necessary to protect basic human rights from being taken away by higher authorities because what use is a
constitution if it fails to operate fairly without bias? The European Communities Act 1972 (ECA 1972) which is the foundation of the UK's entry into
the EU led to the erosion of its parliamentary sovereignty. The enactment of this Act led to the implication that any conflicting domestic laws in
English courts were subjected to the supremacy of European law. This concept was affirmed in Factortame No.2.[5] However, Lord Bridge asserted
that Parliament voluntarily accepted the limitations[6] because it can repeal the ECA 1972 at any desired time by leaving the EU. Contrary to this,
section 18 of the European Union Act 2011 merely confirms that EU laws apply within the UK–according to section 2(1) of the ECA 1972. It may be
argued that the EU membership did not cause any considerable change to the UK's basic constitution. But from this point, it can be agreed that legal
aspects are beginning to surface onto the constitutional system. Most importantly,

вЂ Write a Short Essay Critically and Concisely Discussing...
'Write a short essay critically and concisely discussing the binding sources of law in modern Ireland.'
Binding sources of law in Irish law are the sources created by the binding authorities, that is to say the rules which must be followed in adjudication.
Adjudication is the fact that the judicial decision is binding on the parties involved in a case. Binding authorities must be distinguished from persuasive
authorities. Sources coming from persuasive authorities can eventually be followed in certain circumstances. There is a hierarchy in the sources of
Irish law. Thus, the sources that are going to be studied in this essay are European law, the Irish Constitution, International law, the Legislation and
Case law. Ireland joined the ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
By a legislative act, Irish courts are allowed to use this jurisprudence in Irish law. So the European law is superior to the Irish Constitution,
International law, Irish legislation and Irish case law. The second most important and binding source of law in Irish law is the Irish Constitution. The
Constitution of Ireland is the basic law of the State. It was adopted by plebiscite in 1937. It is the successor of the Constitution of DГЎil Г‰ireann
(1919) and the Constitution of the Irish Free State (1922). The Constitution states that all legislative, executive and judicial powers of Government
derive from the people. It sets out the form of government and defines the powers of the President, the two Houses of the Oireachtas and the
Government. It also defines the structure and powers of the courts, sets out the fundamental rights of citizens and contains a number of directive
principles of social policy for the general guidance of the Oireachtas. The Constitution may be amended only by referendum. In operation since 1937, it
sets general principles about the Irish state. For instance it sets the principle of the separation of powers. It also establishes the judiciary system. As well
as this it creates a parliamentary democracy based on the British parliamentary system. Moreover it establishes fundamental principles and rights
concerning its relation with its citizens, and with other sovereign states. For instance

Human Rights Act 1998 ( Hra )
Section C: 8
Before the Human Rights Act 1998 (HRA) coming into force, the UK subscribed to a 'weak' judicial review. However, the Act has brought a drastic
change into the practice of judicial review in the UK. In this essay, I shall argue that with the new powers conferred to the courts under sections 3 and 4
(ss 3 and 4) of the HRA, they have developed a mechanism which allows the court to communicate with Parliament through their interpretations
although the practice of judicial review remains relatively 'weak'. I shall also argue that the courts should continue the adoption of the new approach to
judicial review in the UK to counterbalance and limit the possibility of State violations of fundamental human rights of individuals whilst still keeping
the principle of parliamentary sovereignty intact.
A weak judicial review is a creation of statute (i.e. the HRA) that reviews the legitimacy of executive powers to ensure the Government acts within the
scope of power Parliament has conferred to them. Compared to a 'strong' judicial review, the UK courts have neither the power to strike down a
primary legislation nor can they review legislation decisions. A weakness of 'strong' judicial review is that it would undermine the principles of
separation of powers and parliamentary sovereignty that underpin the UK Constitution as it would allow the courts to put legal constraints on
Parliament. Therefore, the judiciary should respect the Parliament's decisions and remain the

Human Rights Act
The Human Right Act 1998 is an act of Parliament of the United Kingdom which received Royal Assent on 9 November 1998, and mostly came into
force on 2 October 2000.It's aim is to "give further effect" in UK law to the right contained in the European Convention on Human Right. The Act
makes available in UK courts a remedy for breach of a Convention right, without the need to go to the European Court of Human Right in Strasbourg.
It also totally abolished the death penalty in UK law although this was not required by the Convention in force for the UK at that time. In particular, the
Act makes it unlawful for any public body to act in a way which is incompatible with the Convention, unless the wording of an Act of Parliament means
they have... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Such a Dectaration has no direct impact upon the continuing force of the legislation but it is likely to produce public pressure upon the government
to remove the incompatibility. It also strengthens the case of a claimant armed with such a decision from the demostic courts in any subsequent
appeal to Strasbourg. In order to provide swift compliance with the convention the Act allows Ministers to take remedial action to amend even
offending primary legislation via subordinate legislation. Campbell V MGN ltd (2002) EWCA civ 1373,Naomi Campbell and Sara cox both sought
to assert their right to privacy under the Act. Both cases were successful for the complainant (Campbell's on the second attempt ;cox's attempt was not
judicially decided but an out of court settlement was reached before the issue could be tested in court) and an amendment to British law to
incorporate a provision for prixacy is expected to be introduced. Venables and Thompson v News Group Newspapers (2001) 1 April ER908, the James
Bulger murder case tested whether the Article 8(privacy) rights of Venables and Thomson, and the convicted murderers of Bulgers,applied when four
newspapers sought to public their new identities and whereabouts, using their Article 10 rights of freedom of expression. Dame Butler–sloss granted
permanent global injunction not to public the material because of the disastrous consequences such disclosure might have for the former convicts, not
least the

Sources Of Law And European Convention On Human Rights Essay
Starting with the fact that sources of law in Wales and England are similar, there are 4 sources of law, which are: Statute Law, Common Law,
European Law and European Convention on Human Rights. First of all, Statute law is a written law passed by a legislature on the state of federal
level. An example of it would be В«Theft Act 1968В». It is the first and primary source of law and it is created by proposing a Bill in Parliament. After
three readings of the bill in House of Commons and House of Lords and afterwards in Royal Assent is received and approved, then it becomes a
satute which must be enforced by courts. Secondly, there is a Common Law. Common Law is created by judiciary and it is also known as В«case
lawВ». However, the Common Law could be amended or overridden by Statute Law, EU LAW and/orHuman Rights Law. Third is European union
law. It was created as a result of European Communities Act 1972. There are four principal institutions, which are: The council of the EU, European
Commission, European Parliament and European Court of Justice. They make the decisions concerning laws. Finally, there is European Convention on
Human Rights. It came into effect in October 2000. It takes care about main provisions of the European convention of Human Rights into the UK law.
Those sources of law divide in internal and external, Common and Statute are internal while European Union law and European convention on Human
Rights are external laws. Internal laws refers to laws that

The European Union ( Eu )
The European Union (EU), formerly known as the European Economic Community EEC was created in 1957 by the Treaty of Rome. The Treaty
of Rome was vital as the aftermath of the Second World War left many countries afraid of nationalistic conflicts due to territorial ambitions of
nearby countries. Furthermore, many individuals believed that by merging Western Europe by democracy and common policies, they were
better equipped to stand up to the threat of Soviet Dictatorship by political integration. The United Kingdom joined the EEC in 1973 and agreed to
uphold the existing laws of the EU and the law making powers of the EU. The four freedoms were established so that goods, people, businesses,
services and money can move around the EU freely as if it was one country. The free movement of goods (Article 34 TFEU), allowed goods be
sold from one member state to others without restrictions (Open University, 2014). The free movement of persons (Article 45 and 49 TFEU),
allowed EU citizens the ability to choose which EU country they wish to live, work or study in (The Open University, 2014). The freedom to
provide services (Article, 56 TFEU), was able to be sold all over the EU without restrictions (Open University, 2014). The free movement of Capital
(Article 63, TFEU), allows money to flow freely between EU countries. The four freedoms has had an impact on the UK's economy, tourism, and
population. There are five main political and legal institutions that the EU has

Human Rights Law Course Work
Human Rights Law Course Work
1.0 Introduction
The European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (hereinafter referred to as 'the Convention') stands as the
world's most successful legal instrument and foundation for international legal process in the protection of Human Rights. Drafted two months after the
founding of the Council of Europe, in the aftermath of the atrocities of World War II, it was fundamental to the future and stability of the region to
introduce Human Rights in a document able to bring peace, unity and accountability. This was articulated at the conference of the International
Committee of the Movements for European Unity where the delegates stated: We desire a Charter of Human Rights guaranteeing liberty of thought,
assembly and expression as well as the right to form political opposition; we desire a Court of Justice with adequate sanctions for the implementation of
this charter.
The subject of this paper is on Article 3 of the Convention, a 'cardinal axiom' of International Human Rights Law, in the sense that it provides the
absolute and non–derogable right, which states 'no one shall be subject to torture or inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment'. The prohibition of
torture goes far beyond just written international law and has also been manifested as jus cogens and acknowledged as a fundamental peremptory norm
of general international law. The absolute nature of this right is however not an express

The Issue Of Parliamentary Sovereignty
H
Introduction
The concept of parliamentary sovereignty is one of the imperative components of the supreme legal authority in UK constitution. The parliamentary
supremacy is the key legislative authority body to all governmental establishment in the country. Which implies the parliament can charge power to the
local authorities, professional bodies and statutory instruments to enact legislation.
Practically, the Parliament has the power to make and dissolve any law which means any law passed by the parliament cannot be overruled by any
court rules. No parliament, on the other hand can enact law that a future parliament cannot amend Which means that, they are the only figure that can
change or reverse laws passed by the them.
The UK is ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
The expansion of freedom of information has been a fundamental principle of UK constitutional structures which Parliament should not be a subject to
judicial review (Corporate Officer of the House of Commons v The Information Commissioner). As in the case of (Pickin v British Railways Board)
the Crown has no common–law authority to review Acts.
The Bill has passed through stages before it receives a Royal Assent which is given to the Queen's committee, the Lord Chancellor and two other peers.
It then becomes an Act of Parliament. But will not come into operation until a commencement date is announced by the statutory instrument. The
Parliament Acts 1911 and 1949 weaken the rule as Bills may receive Royal Assent without consent of the House of Lords. In Pickin v British Railways
Board case the Lord Denning challenged that the courts should be mindful when checking procedure to avoid abused of power.
The Limitation of Parliamentary Sovereignty
The supremacy of European Union is not the only development that has undermined the UK supremacy of parliamentary sovereignty. There are recent
developments of Human Right Law and the devolution of Scottish and Wales Assembly which has greatly weaken the traditional notion of parliament
being supreme in UK. Seemingly, the supremacy of European Union is the pillar of all members of the union

The Human Rights Act 1998 sets out fundamental rights for everyone within the UK. This incorporates the rights in which were set out in the
European Convention on Human Rights, meaning if a persons' rights are breached, the case can be brought to UK court rather than seeking justice
from the European Court of Human Rights located in France. In practice, this ensures all new laws are compatible with the Human Rights.
The European Court of Human Rights; which focuses on humanities basic necessities, was created in the UK after World War two after Adolf Hitler's
horrific actions in the 'Nazi' Germany: After such events forty countries signed a waiver agreeing to abide by such laws, but these countries do not
have to be in the European Union. Alongside the European Court of Human Rights there are also the European courts of Justice; which focus on what
is right and wrong; every country within the European Union must abide by these laws which consist of twenty–eight countries, soon to be
twenty–seven countries if the United Kingdom leaves and Brexit takes a full action to leave.
Some of the rights situated within the Human Rights Act are: Obligation to respect human rights, Right to life, Prohibition of torture, Right to a fair
trial, Right to respect for private life, Right to freedom of expression, Freedom of thought, belief and religion.
The UK has had an ongoing development of the human rights since the Magna Carta first appeared in 1215 in which the beginning of limitation

The Decision Of The European Court Of Human Rights
The implication of the removal of the decision of the European Court of Human Rights with English court is contrary to a democratic society. Chris
Grayling the leader of the House of Commons asserts that some human rights need to be changed. The changes may even be simple little changes to
the human rights we have now which is just common sense. Further he mentions we may then be able to avoid the problems that have being
experienced since the Human Right conventions became live 6 decades ago. Chris Grayling also wanted to replace it with bills of rights and to avoid
the European courts. He states this, as he believes from the past years Human rights have changed and are not the same as they were when they first
signed up to them 60 ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
The Magna Carta is symbolic of liberty, within the Magna Carta the three men. The year of the Magna Carta was 1215. It is significant that leaders
must obey the law with democracy but the government doesn't always follow the democracy, such as when they went against the public views when
England went to war with Iraq. The rule of law comprises of 4 all–inclusive standards which are the legislature and its authorities and specialists, and in
addition people and private elements who are responsible under the law. The laws are obviously distributed, stable and are connected equitably to
ensure basic rights including the security of persons and property. The procedure by which the laws are instituted, controlled and upheld is open
reasonable and proficient, equity is conveyed opportune by capable, moral, autonomous delegates and neutrals who are of adequate number, have
satisfactory assets and mirror the cosmetics of the groups ' they serve. The tenet of law is structure of guidelines and rights that make the social orders
as reasonable as could reasonably be expected. The arrangement of tenet of law is that nobody even the administration are exempt from the rules that
everyone else follows.
The law making process is democratic, demonstrating checks and balance of power. Parliament enact the laws, but it goes through a long process
before the law is passed. There are two different types of laws. An act of Parliament and also common law.

Privacy And Freedom Of Expression
Privacy and freedom of expression are both vital in the preservation of society. In stating this one must be acutely aware of the medias role in
directly advocating for freedom of expression over an individual's right to privacy. In AG v Guardian Newspapers, Lord Geoff states that 'freedom of
expression has existed in this country perhaps as long, if not longer, than it has existed in any other country in the world' . Nevertheless these rights
must be balanced and applied in a manner which is just.
Whilst the establishment of the Human Rights Act in 1998 enshrined privacy in to law, according to the House of Lords the general tort of invasion
of privacy was not held by UK law . Changes to this precedent began with the Douglas case in which Hello! Magazine had unauthorised photos of the
couple's wedding with the view to publish them. The decision that these photos were indeed deemed to be private despite a picture deal with another
publication proved to be a controversial one. The ruling made by Lord Justice Sedley rejected the notion that freedom of expression trumped the right
to privacy. With this in mind one must question that as an individual's right to privacy is enshrined in law, what implications and consequences does
this have for the right of freedom expression?
In the Naomi Campbell case the House of Lords ruled that 'unjustified disclosure of private information' could be a cause for legal action. Ms
Campbell's privacy was seen to have been infringed by the

How European Law ( Eu And Echr ) Has An Impact On The Uk
Better off out or in?
Gaining an insight on How and Why European Law (EU and ECHR) has an impact on the UK can be challenging. Before overcoming this obstacle it
is advised to acquire basic knowledge on the founding treaties and those currently in force. The sources of law and their effect will analyse, whether
the UK should remain a part of the European Union or not.
The end of WW2 resulted in the creation of an intergovernmental organization The United Nation, promoting Peace and Human Rights. In 1946, the
British Prime Minister Winston Churchill announced 'we must build a kind of United States of Europe'. Those actions undoubtedly sparked a new
sense of enthusiasm across Europe and demonstrates Britain 's influence on the community.
In 1948 Britain,France,Belgium, the Netherlands and Luxembourg creating a unified defence alliance after signing the Brussels Treaty and the UN
adopted the Universal Declaration of Human
Rights.
An unclear soviet strategy boosted the desire to strengthen military alliances and led towards the establishment of the North Atlantic Treaty
Organisation in 1949
The Council of Europe, was founded in 1949 to provide advice and promote legal standards, human rights, democratic development, the rule of law and
cultural co–operation.
Influenced by the UDHR the CoE drafted the European Convention on Human Rights in 1950 and advised on the creation of the European Court of
Human Rights.
The Treaty of Rome in 1957 established the European Economic

Human Rights Act Of 1998
Rights that protect human beings and the extent of legality of what they are entitled to as people are a core part of each constitution globally. The
extent of human rights protection varies from country to country, with total democracies having most human rights that encompass freedom of speech
and expression among other freedoms. These are the most sovereign of laws as they express how liberal and powerful the majority can be as opposed
to the minority being powerful in some countries or kingdoms. In some countries, the part of the constitution (just answer legal) is referred to as the
Bill of Rights. In the United Kingdom, they are referred to as the human rights act of 1998. It was previously referred to as the Bill of rights though. As
expressed in the UK parliament official website, the Human rights Act came into life in 1998 to "bring rights home" (www.parliament.uk, 2014).
Section 3 of the 1998 Human Rights act has equally been center of controversy and light about various issues as who decides the extent to which the
human rights stretch. The human rights act expresses the human rights that are contained in the European Convention (Jeeves) on Human rights as
part of the UK laws in three forms as follow:
The UK laws should be interpreted in so far as possible to do so, to reflect the consideration for the human rights act.
If Parliament passes an act that is in contravention with the Human rights act, the courts have the mandate to declare such acts as

Child Abduction : Bringing Together The Ecthr And The Ecj...
Child Abduction: Bringing together the ECtHR and the ECJ for the Best Interests of the Child The 1980 Hague Child Abduction Convention provided
the method of securing the prompt return of children to the State of their habitual residence in cases of abduction. The Convention assumes that return
of the children to the State of their habitual residence immediately prior to their abduction is in their best interests. However, it also provides a few
exceptions for the non–return of the child. In case of an establishment of the exception, 'the courts of place where the child is present after abduction
generally have a discretion as to whether to return the child to the State of the habitual residence of the child.' The Brussels II bis... Show more content
on Helpwriting.net ...
For a certain period of time, 'the intervention of the ECtHR in relation to the Abduction Convention had on the whole been positive. However, the
Grand Chamber decision in Neulinger altered this pattern and left the future of the Abduction Convention in jeopardy.' Misunderstandings of the
Abduction Convention by the ECtHR and the ECJ 'The misinterpretation of the Abduction Convention started with the domestic proceedings in
Raban v Romania, where consent was treated as an issue under Article 3 and Article 13(b) was applied under dubious circumstances'. The ECtHR
simply 'agreed with the analysis of the Romanian Court instead of correcting these decisions based on its own interpretation of the Convention'. As
a result of this, the ECtHR held that there was 'no violation of Article 8, the right to family life. The ECtHR said that it "cannot question the
assessment of the domestic authorities, unless there is clear evidence of arbitrariness"'. Background of Raban v Romania In Raban, there were two
children (two and three years old) who were living at the family home with their parents in Israel. It was agreed that the mother and the two children
would visit their maternal family in Romania for a period of six months because the family were facing financial problems in Israel. They left for
Romania on 27 April 2006 and were due to return on 24 October 2006. The mother informed the father on 3 November 2006 that they would remain in
Romania. Therefore, on 8

Human Rights Act
The Human Right Act 1998 is an act of Parliament of the United Kingdom which received Royal Assent on 9 November 1998, and mostly came into
force on 2 October 2000.It's aim is to "give further effect" in UK law to the right contained in the European Convention on Human Right. The Act
makes available in UK courts a remedy for breach of a Convention right, without the need to go to the European Court of Human Right in Strasbourg. It
also totally abolished the death penalty in UK law although this was not required by the Convention in force for the UK at that time.
In particular, the Act makes it unlawful for any public body to act in a way which is incompatible with the Convention, unless the wording of an Act of
Parliament means they ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
This is because section 6(1) of the Human Rights Act defines court and tribunals as public bodies meaning their judgments must comply with human
rights obligations except in cases of declarations of compatibility. Therefore judges have a duty to act in compatibility with the convention even when
an action is a private one between two citizens.
Even thought the Act's interpretative instruction to interpret legislation as compatible with Convention right as so far as is possible in section 3(1)
applies only to statute and not common law it has been argued that section 6 of the Act shows that the only law which should not be subject to human
rights obligations is incompatible legislation. Therefore the common law could be developed in a way which in compatible with the Convention in an
incremental fashion.However,the Human Rights Act cannot be used to create new courses of action in private law.
The Act provides that it is unlawful for a public authority to act in such a way as to contravene convention rights. For those purpose public authority
includes any other person "whose functions are functions of a public

The Importance Of Freedom Of Expression In Democracy

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

More from Holly Schulz

More from Holly Schulz (8)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

The Importance Of Freedom Of Expression In Democracy