header-logo header-logo

A difference of opinion

04 October 2007 / Charmaine Murray , Lee Parkhill
Issue: 7291 / Categories: Features , Public
printer mail-detail

Functions of a public nature should be defined on a case by case basis. Lee Parkhill and Charmaine Murray explain

In YL v Birmingham City Council and others [2007] UKHL 27, [2007] 3 All ER 957 their lordships considered the scope of the Human Rights Act 1998 (HRA 1998), s 6(3)(b), which allows for bodies other than core public authorities to be subject to the obligation, contained in s 6(1), which requires them to act compatibly with the European Convention on Human Rights (the Convention).

An otherwise private body may be regarded as a public authority for the purposes of HRA 1998 if, per s 6(3)(b), it performs “functions of a public nature”. Such a body is commonly referred to as a hybrid public authority. The obligation on such hybrid bodies to observe Convention rights attaches only to functions which are of a public nature. Therefore, determining the scope of s 6(3)(b) is necessary not only to identify which bodies are subject to the obligation in s 6(1), but also to determine

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Freeths—Ruth Clare

Freeths—Ruth Clare

National real estate team bolstered by partner hire in Manchester

Farrer & Co—Claire Gordon

Farrer & Co—Claire Gordon

Partner appointed head of family team

mfg Solicitors—Neil Harrison

mfg Solicitors—Neil Harrison

Firm strengthens agriculture and rural affairs team with partner return

NEWS
Conveyancing lawyers have enjoyed a rapid win after campaigning against UK Finance’s decision to charge for access to the Mortgage Lenders’ Handbook
The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) has launched a recruitment drive for talented early career and more senior barristers and solicitors
Regulators differed in the clarity and consistency of their post-Mazur advice and guidance, according to an interim report by the Legal Services Board (LSB)
The dangers of uncritical artificial intelligence (AI) use in legal practice are no longer hypothetical. In this week's NLJ, Dr Charanjit Singh of Holborn Chambers examines cases where lawyers relied on ‘hallucinated’ citations — entirely fictitious authorities generated by AI tools
The Solicitors Act 1974 may still underpin legal regulation, but its age is increasingly showing. Writing in NLJ this week, Victoria Morrison-Hughes of the Association of Costs Lawyers argues that the Act is ‘out of step with modern consumer law’ and actively deters fairness
back-to-top-scroll