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
The domestic courts and the Strasbourg case law
- 3 things to know
- A2 Units 3 and 4
Overview
Recall 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.
What you need to know
Answer each one before you reveal it.
What did R v Horncastle (2009) decide?
What weight does a Grand Chamber judgment carry in a domestic court?
Questions from this subtopic
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.
Other ways to work this
The same content, four other ways.
What is inside Levo
Six ways to work the same material.
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.