On Fri, 09 May 2008 10:15:20 GMT, David Jones
wrote:
>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 :)
I hadn't thought of that possibility.
It may have some bearing, I don't know.
--
Alex Heney, Global Villager
Famous last words - You and what army?
To reply by email, my address is alexATheneyDOTplusDOTcom |