header-logo header-logo

17 May 2013
Issue: 7560 / Categories: Case law , Law digest , In Court
printer mail-detail

Human rights

A Council v M and others [2012] EWHC 2038 (Fam), [2012] All ER (D) 381 (Jul)
 

Rights arising under Art 8 (right to private and family life) of the European Convention on Human Rights on the one hand and Art 10 (freedom of expression) on the other were different in quality. Article 8 rights were by their nature of crucial importance to a few, while Art 10 rights were typically of general importance to many. The decided cases, together with s 12(4) of the Human Rights Act 1998, acted as a strong reminder that the rights of the many should not be undervalued and incrementally eroded in response to a series of hard cases of individual misfortune. On the other hand, there was no hierarchy of rights and there were cases where individual rights had to prevail. In highly exceptional cases that could even include making inroads into the fundamental right to report criminal proceedings, but only where that was absolutely necessary.

 

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

Bell Yard Kysen—Liz Giles

Bell Yard Kysen—Liz Giles

Bell Yard Kysen appoints senior legal PR and ex-government communications adviser, Liz Giles

Clarke Willmott—Lee Edwards

Clarke Willmott—Lee Edwards

Clarke Willmott boosts Southampton commercial property team with addition of partner Lee Edwards

Lime Solicitors—four promotions

Lime Solicitors—four promotions

Lime Solicitors announces four promotions

NEWS
The Attorney General, Ellie Reeves KC MP, and Solicitor General, Andy Slaughter KC MP, marked the 25th anniversary of Pro Bono Week by joining lawyers, charities, students and parliamentarians at events celebrating voluntary legal work
An indemnity costs battle with a £20m gap could reopen an important question: what weight should an approved budget carry?
Possession claims are entering a new digital era, with procedural traps awaiting practitioners who assume familiar rules still govern every step
Witness evidence can be compromised by AI before a solicitor sees the draft, leaving safeguards focused on authorship incomplete
A polished legal defence may owe more to artificial intelligence than legal merit—and creditors risk paying the price in delay and expense
back-to-top-scroll