header-logo header-logo

01 September 2016
Issue: 7712 / Categories: Legal News , Human rights
printer mail-detail

Questions raised over Bill of Rights

Constitutional law experts have expressed doubt that a Bill of Rights will ever be introduced.

Liz Truss, the Lord Chancellor, has said she will replace the Human Rights Act 1998 (HRA 1998) with a Bill of Rights, as promised in the Conservative manifesto. A draft Bill was drawn up under her predecessor, Michael Gove.

However, Professor Michael Zander QC remains sceptical. Withdrawal from the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) or “any watering down of the rights available under the ECHR, would be fiercely opposed not only by Labour, Liberal Democrat and Scottish and Welsh MPs but by the Dominic Grieve faction in the Conservative Party,” he says. “[The Prime Minister] may decide that this is a battle she does not need.”

NLJ columnist Geoffrey Bindman QC says: “We already have a Bill of Rights. It is ECHR as embodied in HRA 1998.

“Bills of Rights elsewhere, such as the USA, where it forms part of the Constitution, override all other laws, giving the judges power to invalidate inconsistent legislation. HRA 1998 does not have that superiority but a ‘declaration of incompatibility’ provides a simplified parliamentary procedure for bringing other laws into line with it. It is unlikely that a UK parliament would choose to cede sovereignty to the judges. The HRA 1998 model seems the right one for Britain.”

On existing human rights case law if the government did proceed with its plans, Neil Parpworth, De Montfort University, says: “I would have thought it likely that if the new Bill of Rights sought to protect essentially the same rights as those protected under ECHR (and therefore HRA 1998), the body of human rights jurisprudence which has arisen under the Act will have an ongoing relevance and importance.

“In other words, the scope and extent of substantive rights is not likely to change very much in the eyes of the judges unless, that is, the new Bill were to provide for additional limits or qualifications which do not currently exist.”

A Ministry of Justice spokesperson says: “We will set out our proposals for a Bill of Rights in due course. We will consult fully on our proposals.”

Issue: 7712 / Categories: Legal News , Human rights
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Cripps—Radius Law

Cripps—Radius Law

Commercial and technology practice boosted by team hire

Switalskis—Grimsby

Switalskis—Grimsby

Firm expands with new Grimsby office to serve North East Lincolnshire

Slater Heelis—Will Newman & Lucy Spilsbury

Slater Heelis—Will Newman & Lucy Spilsbury

Property team boosted by two solicitor appointments

NEWS
A High Court ruling involving the Longleat estate has exposed the fault line between modern family building and historic trust drafting. Writing in NLJ this week, Charlotte Coyle, director and family law expert at Freeths, examines Cator v Thynn [2026] EWHC 209 (Ch), where trustees sought approval to modernise trusts that retain pre-1970 definitions of ‘child’, ‘grandchild’ and ‘issue’
Fresh proposals to criminalise ‘nudification’ apps, prioritise cyberflashing and non-consensual intimate images, and even ban under-16s from social media have reignited debate over whether the Online Safety Act 2023 (OSA 2023) is fit for purpose. Writing in NLJ this week, Alexander Brown, head of technology, media and telecommunications, and Alexandra Webster, managing associate, Simmons & Simmons, caution against reactive law-making that could undermine the Act’s ‘risk-based and outcomes-focused’ design
Recent allegations surrounding Peter Mandelson and Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor have reignited scrutiny of the ancient common law offence of misconduct in public office. Writing in NLJ this week, Simon Parsons, teaching fellow at Bath Spa University, asks whether their conduct could clear a notoriously high legal hurdle
A landmark ruling has reshaped child clinical negligence claims. Writing in NLJ this week, Jodi Newton, head of birth and paediatric negligence at Osbornes Law, explains how the Supreme Court in CCC v Sheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust [2026] UKSC 5 has overturned Croke v Wiseman, ending the long-standing bar on children recovering ‘lost years’ earnings
A Court of Appeal ruling has drawn a firm line under party autonomy in arbitration. Writing in NLJ this week, Masood Ahmed, associate professor at the University of Leicester, analyses Gluck v Endzweig [2026] EWCA Civ 145, where a clause allowing arbitrators to amend an award ‘at any time’ was held incompatible with the Arbitration Act 1996
back-to-top-scroll