ARTICLE 8

Sections

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 public authority except when:

• in accordance with the law

• necessary in democratic society

• interests of nationals security

or to protect:

• economic well being of country

• prevention of crime

• protection of health + morals

• protection of rights

STEP ONE:

WHAT DOES IT PROTECT?

Private Life-

• physical + psychological integrity

• sex life + gender

• personal data

• names + photos

• reputation

Pretty v UK- protects personal autonomy, can be restricted for assisted suicide in publics interest.

Bensaid v UK- broad definition extends to mental health

Family Life-

• includes grandchildren, adoptive relationships, cohabiting and same sex relationships

Schalk and Kopf v Austria- same sex couples = family life for A8 purposes

Kroon v Netherlands- legal presumption shouldn’t have overridden reality

Gaskin- refusal of medical records = breach for family

Home-

• no specific definition, broadly interpreted and extends to houses, land, and business premises

Niematz v Germany- ‘home’ included workplace

Gillow v UK- courts failed to recognise circumstances (family connection to house)

Halford v UK- breach when intercepting work call

Correspondence:

• includes letters, telephone calls, and faxes/emails

Halford v UK- breach when intercepting work call

STEP TWO:

IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE LAW?

“Law must be clear, predictable, and accessible by the claimant"

Malone v UK- any surveillance interference must be in accordance with the law

Copland v UK- certain communication restrictions are permissible if justified by a legit aim

STEP THREE:

PURSIUT OF A LEGITIMATE AIM?

• national security

• public safety

• economic well-being

• prevent disorder/crime

• protect health/morals

• protects the rights and freedoms of others

Bensaid v UK- A8 protects mental health as treatment was ‘inhumane and degrading’

STEP FOUR:

NECESSARY IN A DEMOCRATIC SOCIETY?

Proportionality→ Handyside-

1. pressing need for social change?

2. does decision correspond to that need?

3. proportionate to that need?

4. are reasons given relevant and sufficient?