header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us
27 October 2020 / Athelstane Aamodt
Issue: 7908 / Categories: Features , Covid-19 , Profession
printer mail-detail

Managing a pandemic: Back to the future?

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.
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

Read All
Sponsored by
Clarke Willmott—Matthew Roach

Clarke Willmott—Matthew Roach

Partner joins commercial property team in Taunton office

Farrer & Co—Richard Lane

Farrer & Co—Richard Lane

Londstanding London firm appoints new senior partner

Bird & Bird—Sue McLean

Bird & Bird—Sue McLean

Commercial team in London welcomes technology specialist as partner

NEWS
Read All
NLJ this week: Is inequality undermining trust?
The legal profession’s claim to be a ‘guardian of fairness’ is under scrutiny after stark findings on gender imbalance and opaque progression. Writing in NLJ this week, Joshua Purser of No5 Barristers’ Chambers and Govindi Deerasinghe of Global 50/50 warn that leadership remains dominated by a narrow elite, with men holding 71% of top court roles
NLJ this week: Freemasons ruling backs police transparency over privacy claims
A legal challenge to police disclosure rules has failed, reinforcing a push for transparency in policing. In NLJ this week, Neil Parpworth examines a case where the Metropolitan Police required officers to declare membership of groups like the Freemasons
NLJ this week: Right to grieve marks ‘major shift’ in employment law
Bereavement leave is undergoing a quiet but profound transformation. Writing in NLJ this week, Robert Hargreaves of York St John University explains how the Employment Rights Act 2025 introduces a day-one right to leave for a wider range of losses, alongside new provisions for pregnancy loss and bereaved partners
NLJ this week: AI privilege battles expose risks
Courts are beginning to grapple with whether AI-generated material is legally privileged—and the answers are mixed. In this week's issue of NLJ, Stacie Bourton, Tom Whittaker & Beata Kolodziej of Burges Salmon examine US rulings showing how easily privilege can be lost
NLJ this week: Experts warned—AI use must be transparent
New guidance seeks to bring order to the growing use of artificial intelligence (AI) in expert evidence. Writing in NLJ this week, Minesh Tanna and David Bridge of Simmons & Simmons set out a framework stressing ‘transparency’, ‘explainability’ and ‘reliability’
Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll