header-logo header-logo

27 October 2020 / Athelstane Aamodt
Issue: 7908 / Categories: Features , Covid-19 , Profession
printer mail-detail

Managing a pandemic: Back to the future?

30358
In the light of the coronavirus outbreak, Athelstane Aamodt analyses the approach to managing pandemics across the centuries

We are all living with the interruptions to normal life that have resulted from the government’s response to coronavirus. The Coronavirus Act 2020 and its 29 schedules, not to mention the secondary legislation that has been passed under its aegis, is the legal framework that governs how much of the country will function in the interim.

All of this begs the question: how were such things handled in the past? How, before the existence of an international body like the World Health Organisation (WHO), which was founded in 1948, did countries manage (or not manage) to contain outbreaks of dangerous diseases by means of legal restrictions?

Quarantine

One of the earliest legal impositions designed to limit the spread of dangerous and infectious diseases is something that we still use today: quarantine. The word derives from quarantena which literally means ‘forty days’ in Italian. A document from 1377 tells us

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Weightmans—Jason Slatcher

Weightmans—Jason Slatcher

Weightmans appoint new Chief Technology Officer

Mishcon de Reya—trainees

Mishcon de Reya—trainees

Mishcon de Reya announces trainee retention rate of 86%

Sackers—Charlotte Adams & Fraser Sutton

Sackers—Charlotte Adams & Fraser Sutton

Sackers welcomes two new Graduate Solicitor Apprentices

NEWS
LexisNexis is delighted to announce the launch of the LexisNexis Legal Awards 2027, celebrating outstanding achievement, innovation and impact across the legal profession
The Legal Services Board (LSB) is to take further enforcement action against the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA), setting additional performance targets and ‘intensifying’ its oversight, it has said
Regulators missed several opportunities to intervene in PM Law Group before it collapsed, an independent review by City firm Jenner & Block has found
An employer’s vicarious liability for the alleged torts of an employee cannot be transferred by TUPE, the Court of Appeal has confirmed
Tiered fees of up to £1,500 for Legal Ombudsman (LeO) cases could leave firms with little option but to pay out, lawyers have warned
back-to-top-scroll