header-logo header-logo

The hunt goes on

17 January 2008 / Neil Parpworth
Issue: 7304 / Categories: Features , Public
printer mail-detail

Is there any hope for campaigners who want to see the ban on hunting with dogs overthrown? Neil Parpworth reports

The Hunting Act 2004 (HuA 2004) is the most recent piece of legislation to be made pursuant to the Parliament Acts 1911 and 1949 procedure, ie without the consent of the House of Lords. The legal validity of HuA 2004 was unsuccessfully challenged by those who want to see the ban on hunting with hounds overthrown (see R (Jackson) v A-G [2005] UKHL 56, [2005] 4 All ER 1253).

Accordingly, the pro-hunting fraternity changed its line of attack by seeking to argue that HuA 2004 was incompatible with the European Convention on Human Rights (the Convention) or inconsistent with the EC Treaty. Its arguments failed to convince either the Divisional Court or the Court of Appeal (see R (on the application of Countryside Alliance) v A-G [2005] EWHC 1677 (Admin), [2005] All ER (D) 482 (Jul) and [2006] EWCA Civ 817, [2006] All ER (D) 264 (Jun)) respectively).

A unanimous House of Lords

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

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Firm expands London disputes practice with senior partner hire

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Senior associate promotion strengthens real estate offering

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Leading patent litigator joins intellectual property team

NEWS
The government’s plan to introduce a Single Professional Services Supervisor could erode vital legal-sector expertise, warns Mark Evans, president of the Law Society of England and Wales, in NLJ this week
Writing in NLJ this week, Jonathan Fisher KC of Red Lion Chambers argues that the ‘failure to prevent’ model of corporate criminal responsibility—covering bribery, tax evasion, and fraud—should be embraced, not resisted
Professor Graham Zellick KC argues in NLJ this week that, despite Buckingham Palace’s statement stripping Andrew Mountbatten Windsor of his styles, titles and honours, he remains legally a duke
Writing in NLJ this week, Sophie Ashcroft and Miranda Joseph of Stevens & Bolton dissect the Privy Council’s landmark ruling in Jardine Strategic Ltd v Oasis Investments II Master Fund Ltd (No 2), which abolishes the long-standing 'shareholder rule'
In NLJ this week, Sailesh Mehta and Theo Burges of Red Lion Chambers examine the government’s first-ever 'Afghan leak' super-injunction—used to block reporting of data exposing Afghans who aided UK forces and over 100 British officials. Unlike celebrity privacy cases, this injunction centred on national security. Its use, the authors argue, signals the rise of a vast new body of national security law spanning civil, criminal, and media domains
back-to-top-scroll