*/
Lord Hoffmann has criticised the European Court of Human Rights for behaving like the US Supreme Court on human rights issues.
Delivering the annual Judicial Studies Board lecture in March, Lord Hoffmann reiterated his support for the text of the European Convention on Human Rights, and its embodiment in the Human Rights Act 1998.
However, he questioned the Court’s application of the “margin of appreciation” between universal human rights and the recognition that these are applied by the national courts. “In practice, the Court has not taken the doctrine of the margin of appreciation nearly far enough,” he said. “It has been unable to resist the temptation to aggrandise its jurisdiction and to impose uniform rules on Member States. It considers itself the equivalent of the Supreme Court of the United States, laying down a federal law of Europe.” While “the practical expression of concepts” may change over the years, the Court was not entitled to “introduce wholly new concepts, such as the protection of the environment, into an international treaty which makes no mention of them, simply because it would be more in accordance with the spirit of the times,” he said.
While the UK legal system was not “perfect”, Lord Hoffmann argued that “detailed decisions about how it could be improved should be made in London, either by our democratic institutions or by judicial bodies which, like the Supreme Court of the United States, are integral with our own society and respected as such”.
Delivering the annual Judicial Studies Board lecture in March, Lord Hoffmann reiterated his support for the text of the European Convention on Human Rights, and its embodiment in the Human Rights Act 1998.
However, he questioned the Court’s application of the “margin of appreciation” between universal human rights and the recognition that these are applied by the national courts. “In practice, the Court has not taken the doctrine of the margin of appreciation nearly far enough,” he said. “It has been unable to resist the temptation to aggrandise its jurisdiction and to impose uniform rules on Member States. It considers itself the equivalent of the Supreme Court of the United States, laying down a federal law of Europe.” While “the practical expression of concepts” may change over the years, the Court was not entitled to “introduce wholly new concepts, such as the protection of the environment, into an international treaty which makes no mention of them, simply because it would be more in accordance with the spirit of the times,” he said.
While the UK legal system was not “perfect”, Lord Hoffmann argued that “detailed decisions about how it could be improved should be made in London, either by our democratic institutions or by judicial bodies which, like the Supreme Court of the United States, are integral with our own society and respected as such”.
Lord Hoffmann has criticised the European Court of Human Rights for behaving like the US Supreme Court on human rights issues.
Chair of the Bar reports back
Marie Law, Director of Toxicology at AlphaBiolabs
A £500 donation from AlphaBiolabs has been made to the leading UK charity tackling international parental child abduction and the movement of children across international borders
Marie Law, Director of Toxicology at AlphaBiolabs, outlines the drug and alcohol testing options available for family law professionals, and how a new, free guide can help identify the most appropriate testing method for each specific case
By Louise Crush of Westgate Wealth Management
Marie Law, Director of Toxicology at AlphaBiolabs, examines the latest ONS data on drug misuse and its implications for toxicology testing in family law cases
A career shaped by advocacy beyond her practice, and the realities of living with an invisible disability – Dr Natasha Shotunde, Black Barristers’ Network Co-Founder and its Chair for seven years, reflects on a decade at the Bar
The odds of success are as unforgiving as ever, but ambition clearly isn’t in short supply. David Wurtzel’s annual deep‑dive into the competition cohort shows who’s entering, who’s thriving and the trends that will define the next wave
Where to start and where to find help? Monisha Shah, Chair of the King’s Counsel Selection Panel, provides an overview of the silk selection process, debunking some myths along the way
Do chatbot providers owe a duty of care for negligent misstatements? Jasper Wong suggests that the principles applicable to humans should apply equally to machines
There is no typical day in the life as a Supreme Court judicial assistant, says Josephine Gillingwater, and that’s what makes the role so enjoyably diverse
