On Thu, 08 May 2008 22:28:36 +0100, Alex Heney wrote:
>I can understand the decisions in both this case and the Campbell
>case, given what is said about the evolution of common law to
>incorporate the principles of articles 8 & 10 of the ECHR.
>
>I don't understand *why* the Lords felt that our common law, which has
>never had any general expectation of privacy, should be extended in
>that way, but they seemed to be unanimous on that aspect.
>
>The split judgment in the Campbell case was not (as I read it) about
>whether those articles should be incorporated, but about which side of
>the balance between those articles the (newspaper) article and
>photographs fell.
Is it perhaps the case that the courts, being public bodies, are bound
to observe the HRA and this applies not only to their day-to-day
procedures but also how they shape common law now.
Or not :) |