On 2 October 2000 the European Convention of Human Rights (ECHR) was incorporated directly into English law under the provisions of the Human Rights Act 1998 (HRA).
An early clue to the uncertainties likely to be created by the HRA was seen in the disciplinary action commenced by the British Boxing Board of Control against Mike Tyson. His Counsel, Geoffrey Robertson QC, attempted to characterise Mike Tyson as a potential "victim" under its provisions.
Although, Tyson was fined £125,000 for throwing punches after the bell following his fight with Lou Savarese, he was merely rebuked for his threat to "rip out" Lennox Lewis’ heart and "eat his children".
Geoffrey Robertson QC told the Board that, if Tyson was banned for life, it could be sued under Section 10 of the HRA. Tyson's words, according to Robertson, were "ludicrous and fantastical …not even a moron in a hurry would take the threat seriously".
Ironically in the context of the above, the declared purpose of the HRA is to promote respect for human rights and responsibilities. The rights protected by the ECHR include the right to a fair trial (Article 6), the freedom of expression (Article 10), the right to privacy (Article 8), the right to property (Article 1 Protocol 1), freedom of assembly and association (Article 11) and freedom of thought, conscience and religion (Article 9).
The ECHR was originally drafted in response to human rights violations in World War II. The United Kingdom was one of the first member states of the European Union to sign up. However, until now, if an individual felt his rights had been violated, he was only able to apply to the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg once his case had gone through all the domestic courts - obviously an expensive and time consuming process.
With the HRA's implementation, decisions made by a public authority must not infringe rights guaranteed under the Act. Public authorities are those bodies who provide a 'public service' such as the police and the civil service. The 'victim' will be able to enforce his rights through the English Courts which will have to take into account the decisions and opinions of the European Court of Human Rights.
Some corporate bodies, such as public transport companies and privatised utilities i.e. power and water companies, will be classed as public authorities because they provide some public services and will therefore be affected by the HRA. Private businesses with public activities, for example companies running prisons and healthcare providers for local authority contracts, could also be affected.
However, for business with no public function the HRA could be of benefit, giving it protection for the rights it can enjoy as a company, for example, the right to a fair trial. Companies could also be given wide protection for their assets including patents, shares and business goodwill under the right to peaceful enjoyment of possessions. Also, companies may enjoy rights to the protection of property, for example, if they are refused planning permission. However companies may not find it so easy to sue for libel as this may conflict with the right to freedom of expression.
Where rights are in conflict, the courts will decide where the balance lies. Judges will decide cases as they come before them. If the courts decide a statute breaches the HRA it can be declared 'incompatible' and it will then be for Parliament to amend the law.
This edition of CDR Exchange focuses on areas of commercial activity likely to be affected by the introduction of the HRA. This new culture of respect for human rights and responsibilities is expected, over time, to permeate all our institutions and society. We shall see how the HRA is received but in the meantime, business should be aware of both the extra protection and responsibilities the HRA affords to it.
The information and opinions contained in this publication are provided by national law firm Hammond Suddards Edge. They should not be applied to any particular set of facts without seeking appropriate legal or other professional advice.
