header-logo header-logo

Trouble brewing

15 November 2007 / Steve Gallagher
Issue: 7297 / Categories: Features , Discrimination
printer mail-detail

Will the new religious hate law help or hinder the cause of freedom? Steve Gallagher wonders

Despite the Racial and Religious Hatred Act 2006 (RRHA 2006) receiving Royal Assent on 16 February 2006, it was hoped by many commentators that no commencement order would ever be made for this potentially troublesome Act.

Unfortunately for them, the Racial and Religious Hatred Act 2006 (Commencement No1) Order (SI 2490/2007) has implemented most of RRHA 2006 into the law of England and Wales from 1 October 2007.
After long debate over the original Bill the House of Lords watered down the government’s proposals, significantly affecting their impact:
- Unlike racial offences the offences must be “threatening” not just “abusive” or “insulting”.
- The words, actions, materials, recordings etc must also be “intended” to stir up religious hatred.
- Section 29B—the offence may be committed in a public or private place, but there is no offence if “the words or behaviour are used, or the written material displayed”, inside a dwelling and only heard or seen by other persons inside that or another private

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

Pillsbury—Steven James

Pillsbury—Steven James

Firm boosts London IP capability with high-profile technology sector hire

Clarke Willmott—Michelle Seddon

Clarke Willmott—Michelle Seddon

Private client specialist joins as partner in Taunton office

DWF—Rory White-Andrews

DWF—Rory White-Andrews

Finance and restructuring offering strengthened by partner hire in London

NEWS
Mazur v Charles Russell Speechlys LLP [2025] EWHC 2341 (KB) continues to stir controversy across civil litigation, according to NLJ columnist Professor Dominic Regan of City Law School—AKA ‘The insider’
SRA v Goodwin is a rare disciplinary decision where a solicitor found to have acted dishonestly avoided being struck off, says Clare Hughes-Williams of DAC Beachcroft in this week's NLJ. The Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal (SDT) imposed a 12-month suspension instead, citing medical evidence and the absence of harm to clients
In their latest Family Law Brief for NLJ, Ellie Hampson-Jones and Carla Ditz of Stewarts review three key family law rulings, including the latest instalment in the long-running saga of Potanin v Potanina
The Asian International Arbitration Centre’s sweeping reforms through its AIAC Suite of Rules 2026, unveiled at Asia ADR Week, are under examination in this week's NLJ by John (Ching Jack) Choi of Gresham Legal
In this week's issue of NLJ, Yasseen Gailani and Alexander Martin of Quinn Emanuel report on the High Court’s decision in Skatteforvaltningen (SKAT) v Solo Capital Partners LLP & Ors [2025], where Denmark’s tax authority failed to recover £1.4bn in disputed dividend tax refunds
back-to-top-scroll