Judicial Reasoning under the UK Human Rights Act

A collection of essays examining the judicial decision-making process under the Human Rights Act 1998.

A collection of essays examining judicial decision-making under the Human Rights Act 1998. Focusing on content and process, it considers changes in the substantive law and the new processes of judicial reasoning being adopted. The uses of such concepts are examined, as are the modes of reasoning adopted by judges.Judicial Reasoning under the UK Human Rights Act is a collection of essays written by leading experts in the field, which examines judicial decision-making under the UK's de facto Bill of Rights. The book focuses both on changes in areas of substantive law and the techniques of judicial reasoning adopted to implement the Act. The contributors therefore consider first general Convention and Human Rights Act concepts – statutory interpretation, horizontal effect, judicial review, deference, the reception of Strasbourg case-law – since they arise across all areas of substantive law. They then proceed to examine not only the use of such concepts in particular fields of law (privacy, family law, clashing rights, discrimination and criminal procedure), but also the modes of reasoning by which judges seek to bridge the divide between familiar common law and statutory doctrines and those in the Convention.