HRA 1998

the mechanisms within the domestic courts for enforcing human rights.

Prior to 2000  

• the rights under the ECHR were not directly enforceable in domestic courts.

Post 2000 

• after the passage of the Human Rights Act, these rights were fully enforceable in the UK courts 

• HRA is not entrenched 

• BUT - if parliament repeal → dissolved nations can block move

• UK could change devolution agreements only in consultation with devoted assembly (parliament)

• REPEALING WOULD BE PROBLEMATIC

1. Rationale for the Act: ‘Bringing Rights Home’. Making ECHR directly available in UK courts.

• Enforced rights quickly and cheaply than going ECtHR

2. Key Provisions of the Act:

s1 

Incorporating ECHR rights into domestic law

s2 

Courts must ‘take into account’ prior decisions of ECHR where relevant

• Vague → not bound by it

• Lower courts must follow UK decisions 

• Extra time + money needed to take case higher so appeal court can follow ECtHR

• ECtHR set precedent for UK domestic courts ensuring consistency across all states in ECHR

s3 

Interpretation of domestic legislation: Need for compatibility of domestic and primary legislation with the ECHR

• Challenged delegation allowed by primary delegation

• JUDGES HAVE TO USE PURPOSIVE APPROACH TO KEEP IN LINE WITH PRECEDENT - pressurised?

• WILL OVERRULE ANYTHING THAT IS NOT IN LINE WITH THE CONVENTION

• Purposive approach helps judges interpret UK legislation in light of ECHR

s4 

…