Article 6 and the nature of an absolute right

Overview

Equality of arms and flagrant denial of justice.

What you need to know

Answer each one before you reveal it.

Questions from this subtopic

Each one with the model answer underneath.

1. 1

   In what sense is the right to a fair trial an absolute right?

   Model answer

   The right to a fair trial cannot be balanced away against the public interest. Article 6 contains no second paragraph permitting interference in the way the qualified Articles do.

2. 2

   Which case explained that the components of Article 6 are not themselves absolute?

   Model answer

   Brown v Stott [2003] held that the right to a fair trial is absolute although its individual components are not. The Privy Council upheld a road traffic requirement to say who had been driving.

3. 3

   Why did the requirement in Brown v Stott [2003] not make the trial unfair?

   Model answer

   The Privy Council treated a narrow duty to identify a driver as a proportionate response to deaths on the roads. The privilege against self-incrimination is implied into Article 6, so it may be qualified.

4. 4

   Which case implied a right of access to a court into Article 6?

   Model answer

   Golder v United Kingdom (1975) implied a right of access to a court into Article 6. A prisoner refused permission to consult a solicitor had been denied that access.

5. 5

   What limits may be placed on the right of access to a court?

   Model answer

   Ashingdane v United Kingdom (1985) held that a limit must pursue a legitimate aim and be proportionate. A limit must never impair the very essence of the right of access.

6. 6

   Which other guarantees have been implied into Article 6?

   Model answer

   The privilege against self-incrimination and the right to silence have both been implied into Article 6. Equality of arms between the parties is a further implied requirement.

Other ways to work this

The same content, four other ways.

What is inside Levo

Six ways to work the same material.