A Kavanaugh Human Rights Act Flashcards
What case does A. Kavanaugh analyse the interpretation of the Human Rights Act 1998 s.3(1)?
Kavanaugh analyses the interpretation in the case of R. v A, which involved the admissibility of evidence about a complainant’s sexual history in a rape trial.
How did the House of Lords balance judicial discretion in R. v A?
The House of Lords balanced judicial discretion by interpreting the Human Rights Act 1998 s.3(1) within the framework of the Youth Justice and Criminal Evidence Act 1999 s.41, which restricts evidence of a complainant’s sexual history.
What was Lord Steyn’s position on the limitations of judicial interpretation in R. v A?
Lord Steyn acknowledged the inherent limitations of judicial interpretation, stating that his test for admissibility was not an attempt to revert to pre-1999 laws but rather a more constrained approach.
How does Lord Steyn’s approach in R. v A seek to balance legal frameworks?
Lord Steyn’s approach seeks to balance the existing legal framework with the obligations under the European Convention on Human Rights.
What did Lord Nicholls note about the Human Rights Act in the Attorney General’s Reference (No 4 of 2002)?
Lord Nicholls noted that the Human Rights Act occasionally necessitates deviations from the original legislative intentions of Parliament to fulfill its overriding goals.
