Article 8

Article 8

Right to respect for family and private life

8(1)

everyone has the right to respect for his private and family life, his home and his correspondence

8(2)

There shall be no interference by a public authority with the exercise of this right except such as in accordance with the law and is necessary in a democratic society in the interests of:

• National security

• Public safety

• Economic well being of the country

• Prevention of disorder or crime

• For the protection of health or morals

• Protection of rights and freedoms of others

Steinfeld v Keidan v SS for international Development - Test for proportionate interference

Interferences must be proportionate to achieving targets:

• Importance of limiting legislation

• Limitation is not arbitrary / unfair

• limit as far as necessary

• Interference cant be wildly disproportionate

• Is there a fair balance between competing interests of society vs individual.

Sheffield and Horsham v UK

UK gov refused to recognise gender reassignment. ECtHR criticised Gov for failing to keep law up to date.

4 protected rights

1. Private life

2. Family life

3. Home

4. Correspondence

Private life

Defined widely under Article 8

Private life does not mean privacy

Evaluation point: they have been expanding over time - Bensaid v UK (Mental Health) + Halford v UK (surveillance)

MS v Sweden

Medical data given by a doctor to an insurance agency. Held ‘respecting the confidentiality of health data is a vital principle in the legal systems of all contracting parties to the convention.’

Roche v UK

MoD refused access to his medical records, held not giving access to a persons medical records is a violation of art 8

S & Marper v UK

Retaining data samples of those found not guilty of an offence is a violation of art 8

Elements of Breach of Confidence

1. Info confidential in nature

2. Obtained in situation that suggests confidence

3. Unauthorised use

Kroon v Netherlands

Defined Family life

R (Agyarko v Ikugua) v SSHD

Case for permitting stay for those overstaying visas:

1. “Insourmountable obstacles” to the couple continuing their life outside the UK

2. “Exceptional circumstances” such that refusal would result in unjustifiably harsh consequences, resulting in violation of Art 8

“insourmountable obstacles” does not mean mere inconvenience, it means very serious practical or factual barriers which would make relocation abroad effectively impossible

Yousef v Netherlands

Children can affect immigration status

Khatun v UK

Home life shi

Marazi v Italy

Provide alternative accomodation to those displaced or who have disabilities or special needs.

Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 (RIPA)

Surveillance defined as ‘monitoring, observing or listening to persons, their movements, their conversations or other communications.’

RIPA permissions

• Directed surveillance (watching a house)

• Intrusive surveillance (device or person on a residential premises)

• Covert sources (informants/ undercover relationship)

Surveillance must be necessary

Right to correspondence

• Correspondence in a wide sense of electronic communications

• Halford v UK - Monitoring phone calls

• Klass v Germany - held surveillance tolerable so far as necessary

Malone v UK

Phone tapping was held to breach Art 8