On what basis may an individual use the Human Rights Act 1998 (HRA) to ground a cause of action before a UK court?

Question

Quizplus · Accepted Answer

The Answer is The only direct cause of action permitted by the HRA is to enable a claimant (the 'victim' of a human rights infringement) to bring an action against a 'public authority' for the breach of a right protected by European Convention on Human Rights (a 'Convention right'). Whether or not a body constitutes a 'public authority' is thus critical in determining whether there will be a cause of action. 'Public authority' is a technical term under the HRA, though it is not defined by the Act. Case law indicates that the question is resolved by looking at the functions of the body in question: in exercising the powers that are being challenged, is it exercising a public function or service on behalf of the state, or in a manner equivalent to a function of the state? If so, it is likely to be a public authority for the purposes of the Act. The HRA cannot be the basis of a cause of action between private parties, though Convention rights may be relied upon indirectly in litigation between such parties. This can be achieved by the claimant bringing a claim based on a cause of action outside the HRA, and alleging a duty on the court, under s.6(1) HRA, to interpret the law consistently with Convention rights. So, for example, a claimant might proceed against a newspaper (a private body) using an existing cause of action, such as breach of confidence, and then argue that the courts' duty to act compatibly with Article 8 requires it to interpret the common law so as to find for the claimant.

On What Basis May an Individual Use the Human Rights