levo

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.

Your recallNot started
Evaluation

Give the criticism of the mirror principle.

Key term

What did R v Horncastle (2009) decide?

Key term

What weight does a Grand Chamber judgment carry in a domestic court?

Questions from this subtopic

Each one with the model answer underneath.

  1. 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. 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. 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. 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. 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. 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.

1Closed book
2Open book
3Closed book

See a huge jump in your memorisation

Answer cold, learn it, then prove it stuck. Levo tracks the jump between your first attempt and your last.

Law Making in Wales and the UK
Delegated Legislation
Statutory Interpretation
Judicial Precedent

Cram a whole paper in one sitting

Sort every topic into what you know and what you do not, then drill only the weak ones.

Roles v Nathan ( ).
196319411945

Blank Blitz consolidates the facts

Rapid timed gap-fills on the terms and numbers you need to recall without thinking.

AThe defendant owed the victim a duty of care and breached it.
BThe breach carried a reasonably foreseeable risk of death.
CThe breach caused the death.

Build It trains answer structure

Assemble a full-mark answer from its marking points, in the order an examiner wants them.

Pecuniary loss is financial and measurable.
TrueFalse

Test It catches misconceptions

Spot the fault in a statement. The traps are the mistakes students actually make.

721941163128510

Brain Breaks between sessions

Short focus games to reset attention, so the next set lands better than the last.

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.