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
Jurit LLP—Caroline Williams

Jurit LLP—Caroline Williams

Private wealth and tax team welcomes cross-border specialist as consultant

HFW—Simon Petch

HFW—Simon Petch

Global shipping practice expands with experienced ship finance partner hire

Freeths—Richard Lockhart

Freeths—Richard Lockhart

Infrastructure specialist joins as partner in Glasgow office

NEWS
Read All
NLJ this week: No such thing as a ‘Welsh seat’
Talk of a reserved ‘Welsh seat’ on the Supreme Court is misplaced. In NLJ this week, Professor Graham Zellick KC explains that the Constitutional Reform Act treats ‘England and Wales’ as one jurisdiction, with no statutory Welsh slot
NLJ this week: Jury reform risks justice for efficiency’s sake
The government’s plan to curb jury trials has sparked ‘jury furore’. Writing in NLJ this week, David Locke, partner at Hill Dickinson, says the rationale is ‘grossly inadequate’
NLJ this week: Crypto fightback offers ‘new frontier for law’
A year after the $1.5bn Bybit heist, crypto fraud is booming—but so is recovery. Writing in NLJ this week, Neil Holloway, founder and CEO of M2 Recovery, warns that scams hit at least $14bn in 2025, fuelled by ‘pig butchering’ cons and AI deepfakes
NLJ this week: Time to revive the duty to report crime?
After Woodcock confirmed no general duty to warn, debate turns to the criminal law. Writing in NLJ this week, Charles Davey of The Barrister Group urges revival of misprision or a modern equivalent
NLJ this week: When are experts truly ‘necessary’?
Family courts are tightening control of expert evidence. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Chris Pamplin says there is ‘no automatic right’ to call experts; attendance must be ‘necessary in the interests of justice’ under FPR Pt 25
Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll