header-logo header-logo

26 November 2009 / Nicholas Dobson
Issue: 7395 / Categories: Features , Public
printer mail-detail

Regretable consequences

R(L) demonstrates justifiable interference with Article 8 rights, says Nicholas Dobson

With the flow of time, the once-alien concepts of the European Court of Human Rights have become so seamlessly absorbed into mainstream UK jurisprudence that the joins are now all but invisible to the naked legal eye. And so well-used to the proportionality balance have UK public lawyers become that this now feels as familiar as a trusted old legal tome. But, like all life on earth, proportionality is constantly evolving as the courts apply it to the infinitely variable facts and circumstances of the legal human condition.

A decision of the Supreme Court on 29 October 2009 illustrates the kinship in appropriate cases between proportionality and the common law doctrine of fairness in decisions as to whether it is justifiable to interfere with the right to respect for private and family life under Art 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights. The case in question was R (L) v Commissioner of Police for the Metropolis [2009] UKSC 3 and the lead judgment was

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

NLJ Career Profile: Nikki Bowker, Devonshires

NLJ Career Profile: Nikki Bowker, Devonshires

Nikki Bowker, head of litigation and dispute resolution at Devonshires, on career resilience, diversity in law and channelling Elle Woods when the pressure is on

Ellisons—Sarah Osborne

Ellisons—Sarah Osborne

Leasehold enfranchisement specialist joins residential property team

DWF—Chris Air

DWF—Chris Air

Firm strengthens commercial team in Manchester with partner appointment

NEWS
Contract damages are usually assessed at the date of breach—but not always. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Gascoigne, knowledge lawyer at LexisNexis, examines the growing body of cases where courts have allowed later events to reshape compensation
The Supreme Court has restored ‘doctrinal coherence’ to unfair prejudice litigation, writes Natalie Quinlivan, partner at Fieldfisher LLP, in this week' NLJ
The High Court’s refusal to recognise a prolific sperm donor as a child’s legal parent has highlighted the risks of informal conception arrangements, according to Liam Hurren, associate at Kingsley Napley, in NLJ this week
The Court of Appeal’s decision in Mazur may have settled questions around litigation supervision, but the profession should not simply ‘move on’, argues Jennifer Coupland, CEO of CILEX, in this week's NLJ
A simple phrase like ‘subject to references’ may not protect employers as much as they think. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Smith, barrister and emeritus professor of employment law at UEA, analyses recent employment cases showing how conditional job offers can still create binding contracts
back-to-top-scroll