WJEC A-Level Law 603-1978-1
Law Making in Wales and the UK
Delegated Legislation
Statutory Interpretation
Judicial Precedent
The Civil Courts and Dispute Resolution
The Criminal Process and the Criminal Courts
Legal Personnel and the Judiciary
Access to Justice and Funding
Tort: Rules and Theory
Tort: Negligence
Tort: Occupiers' Liability
Tort: Remedies
Human Rights: Rules and TheoryHuman rights
Human Rights: Key Convention ProvisionsHuman rights
Human Rights: RestrictionsHuman rights
Human Rights: EnforcementHuman rights
Human Rights: Protection and ReformHuman rights
Contract: Rules and TheoryContract
Contract: FormationContract
Contract: TermsContract
Contract: Misrepresentation and DuressContract
Contract: DischargeContract
Contract: RemediesContract
Criminal Law: Rules and TheoryCriminal
Criminal Law: General Elements of LiabilityCriminal
Criminal Law: Offences Against the PersonCriminal
Criminal Law: Property OffencesCriminal
Criminal Law: DefencesCriminal
Criminal Law: Preliminary OffencesCriminal
Human Rights: Enforcement
- 7 subtopics
- 21 things to know
- A2 Units 3 and 4
- Human Rights Law, one of three A2 areas of which two are studied
What Human Rights: Enforcement covers
Human Rights: Enforcement is examined in A2 Units 3 and 4 — Human Rights Law, one of three areas of which a student studies two. Unit 3 applies these rules to a scenario and Unit 4 evaluates them.. It covers the domestic courts and the Strasbourg case law, compatible interpretation and declarations of incompatibility, public authorities, victims and remedies under sections 6 to 8, the judicial review procedure, the grounds for judicial review, the European Court of Human Rights and evaluating the enforcement of human rights.
Where it is assessed
A2 Units 3 and 4
human rights law — one of three areas of which two are studied, applied in one paper and evaluated in the other.
Check the WJEC specification ↗The 7 subtopics
Each one has its own page.
- The domestic courts and the Strasbourg case lawRecall questions on the choice of take into account over be bound by, the mirror principle and its critics, Pinnock and Horncastle, Grand Chamber judgments, and the case for amendment.Open →
- Compatible interpretation and declarations of incompatibilityRecall questions on how far reading down can go after Ghaidan, its limits, the controversy over R v A (No 2), Bellinger, and who is entitled to be heard.Open →
- Public authorities, victims and remedies under sections 6 to 8Recall questions on the core and hybrid distinction, YL v Birmingham and Parliament's response, horizontal effect, the victim test and time limit, and damages compared with tort.Open →
- The judicial review procedureJudicial review and difference between review and appeal.Open →
- The grounds for judicial reviewIllegality as a ground of review, decision taken for an improper purpose and taking an irrelevant consideration into account.Open →
- The European Court of Human RightsExhaustion of domestic remedies rule, friendly settlement and pilot judgment.Open →
- Evaluating the enforcement of human rightsRecall questions on whether domestic enforcement is weaker than it looks, the cost of judicial review, delay at Strasbourg, the enforcement of its judgments, and the charge of judicial activism.Open →
What you need to know
Answer each one before you reveal it.
What is meant by horizontal effect under the Human Rights Act 1998?
Why is the victim test narrower than the test in ordinary judicial review?
Give the criticism of the mirror principle.
What is the difference between review and appeal?
Which case gave the irrationality test its name?
Where does the European Court of Human Rights sit and to which organisation does it belong?
Give the argument that domestic enforcement under the Human Rights Act 1998 has been effective.
What did R v Horncastle (2009) decide?
What does section 3 of the Human Rights Act 1998 direct a court to do?
Which court hears a claim for judicial review?
What are the two limbs of natural justice?
What time limit applies to an application to the European Court of Human Rights?
Give the argument that domestic enforcement of human rights is weaker than it looks
What weight does a Grand Chamber judgment carry in a domestic court?
Why is R v A (No 2) controversial?
What is the exception in section 6(2)?
What is the permission stage in judicial review?
What is a legitimate expectation?
How is a plainly inadmissible application to the European Court of Human Rights dealt with?
Give the criticism that judicial review is too expensive to be a real remedy.
Take Human Rights: Enforcement further
The same content, four other ways.
Commonly confused
Pairs that lose marks when they are blurred together.
Judicial review vs Appeal
Judicial review: examining whether the decision was reached lawfully and normally sends the matter back. Appeal: reconsidering the merits, and it may substitute a different outcome.
Illegality vs Irrationality
Illegality: a failure to understand or give effect to the law governing the power. Irrationality: a decision so unreasonable that no sensible body could have reached it.
Quashing order vs Mandatory order
Quashing order: setting aside a decision already made. Mandatory order: compelling a public body to carry out a duty it has failed to perform.
Questions from this topic
Each one with the model answer underneath.
- 1
What does section 2 of the Human Rights Act 1998 require a domestic court to do with Strasbourg case law?
Model answer
It must take that case law into account when deciding a question connected with a Convention right, but it is not bound to follow it.
- 2
Why did Parliament choose the words take into account rather than be bound by?
Model answer
So that domestic courts could develop the Convention rights in a way that fitted domestic law and could decline to follow a ruling that had misunderstood the domestic system.
- 3
What is the mirror principle?
Model answer
The approach associated with R (Ullah) v Special Adjudicator (2004), that domestic courts should keep pace with the Strasbourg case law as it develops, no more but certainly no less.
- 4
Give the criticism of the mirror principle.
Model answer
Critics say it turns domestic judges into followers rather than developers of rights, so the Convention operates as a ceiling on protection instead of the floor the treaty describes.
- 5
What did Manchester City Council v Pinnock (2010) say about following Strasbourg?
Model answer
A domestic court should follow a clear and constant line of Strasbourg decisions unless the reasoning overlooks or misunderstands some principle of domestic law.
- 6
What did R v Horncastle (2009) decide?
Model answer
The Supreme Court declined to follow a Strasbourg ruling on hearsay evidence, holding that the Chamber had not appreciated the safeguards already built into English criminal procedure.
What is inside Levo
Six ways to work the same material.
Human Rights: Enforcement revision questions
- What does Human Rights: Enforcement cover in WJEC A-Level Law?
- 7 subtopics: the domestic courts and the strasbourg case law, compatible interpretation and declarations of incompatibility, public authorities, victims and remedies under sections 6 to 8, the judicial review procedure, the grounds for judicial review, the european court of human rights and evaluating the enforcement of human rights. Each one has its own page with questions and model answers.
- How is Human Rights: Enforcement organised?
- By the WJEC 603-1978-1 specification, subtopic by subtopic, so it matches the order you are taught it in.
Every question in Human Rights: Enforcement, on a schedule.
Attempt a question from memory, write the correct version, then attempt it again. Levo records the jump between your first attempt and your last, and brings each question back on the day you are due to forget it.
Or £46 a year, about £3.83 a month. Cancel anytime.