(Opinion) The applicants challenged the introduction of restrictions of hunting by foxes, arguing that the law would infringe their human rights.
Held: The Act was not infringing. Fox hunting as such was not a private activity protected by the Convention, and the interference with property rights was justified by the balancing interest of preventing cruelty to animals. The discrimination which was necessarily part of the engagement of the applicant’s human rights, was justified.
The complaint that the Act was ultra vires the parliament also failed. It was wrong to import the common law concepts in considering the competence of the Scottish Parliament.
Judges:
Lord Nimmo Smith
Citations:
Times 08-Aug-2002, [2002] ScotCS 344, 2002 SCLR 881, 2003 SLT 366, 2002 GWD 26-879, [2002] UKHRR 1189, 2003 SC 171
Links:
Statutes:
European Convention on Human Rights 8 14 1st protocol, Protection of Wild Mammals (Scotland) Act 2002, Protection of Wild Mammals (Scotland) Act 2002 (Commencement) Order 2002
Citing:
Cited – Klass And Others v Germany ECHR 6-Sep-1978
(Plenary Court) The claimant objected to the disclosure by the police of matters revealed during their investigation, but in this case, it was held, disclosure even after the event ‘might well jeopardise the long-term purpose that originally . .
Cited – Young, James And Webster v The United Kingdom ECHR 18-Oct-1982
Hudoc Judgment (Just satisfaction) Pecuniary damage – financial award; Non-pecuniary damage – financial award; Costs and expenses award – Convention proceedings
ECHR . .
Cited – Krone Verlag Gmbh and Co Kg v Austria ECHR 26-Feb-2002
Hudoc Judgment (Merits and just satisfaction) Violation of Art. 10; Pecuniary damage – financial award; Costs and expenses award – domestic proceedings; Costs and expenses award – Convention proceedings; . .
Cited – Norris v Ireland ECHR 26-Oct-1988
A homosexual man complained that the criminalisation of homosexual conduct in Ireland violated his article 8 right to respect for his private life, although he accepted that the risk of being prosecuted was remote.
Held: The court accepted . .
Cited – Purcell v Ireland ECHR 16-Apr-1991
The applicants were several individuals and two trades unions who complained that a ministerial order made under legislation relating to broadcasting infringed their rights under Article 10 of the Convention.
Held: The Commission rejected the . .
Cited – Chassagnou and Others v France ECHR 29-Apr-1999
A law permitted local authorities to oblige landowners to transfer hunting rights over private land to approved hunting associations. The landowners could not prevent hunting on their property. Landowners so affected were made members automatically . .
Cited – Handyside v The United Kingdom ECHR 7-Dec-1976
Freedom of Expression is Fundamental to Society
The appellant had published a ‘Little Red Schoolbook’. He was convicted under the 1959 and 1964 Acts on the basis that the book was obscene, it tending to deprave and corrupt its target audience, children. The book claimed that it was intended to . .
Cited by:
Cited – Imperial Tobacco Ltd v The Lord Advocate SC 12-Dec-2012
The claimant company said that the 2010 Act was outside the competence of the Scottish Parliament insofar as it severely restricted the capacity of those selling cigarettes to display them for sale. They suggested two faults. First, that the subject . .
Cited – Local Government Byelaws (Wales) Bill 2012 – Reference By The Attorney General for England and Wales SC 21-Nov-2012
Under the 1998 and 2006 Acts, the Welsh Assembly was empowered to pass legislation subject to confirmation by the English Parliament Secretary of State. The Local Government Byelaws (Wales) Bill 2012 was passed by the Assembly and purported to . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Scotland, Human Rights, Animals, Constitutional
Updated: 06 June 2022; Ref: scu.174454