Concept Of Public Authority Under HRA 1
Concept of Public Authority under HRA 1998
It is unlawful under the section 6 of the Human Rights Act 1998 for a public authority to act in a manner which is inconsistent with the European Convention on Human Rights.1 This means that the public authorities must also act in compliance with the Convention Rights. Thus, if a body which is a public body acts in a manner which is not in compliance with the Convention rights then its action can be challenged in the court.
The question then arises that what amounts to ‘public authority’. A terse definition is given by the subsection (3) of the section 6 that public authority includes a court or a tribunal or any person who performs function of a public nature. This therefore turns the arrow towards ‘public functions’ i.e. anyone performing public functions amounts to public body. The question then arises that what is the definition of public functions. This has been defined overtime by the courts and no single definite definition exists in relation to this.
The Joint Committee of House of Lords and House of Commons defined the meaning of Public Authority in their Seventh Report of the 2003-04 Session. The report distinguished between two types of authorities who could be regarded as public authority for the purpose of the Act. First the authorities that are purely public in nature i.e. established by the state such as local councils, tribunals, courts, government departments, police, etc. These authorities are bound by the HRA 1998. Their activities towards the community are public functions so they are bound by the Section 6(3) of the Act to act in a manner which is consistent with the Act. And they are also bound in their private dealings because they are public bodies and the Section 6(1) does not excuse them from compliance if they are acting in private capacity. The report however highlights the binding effect on private bodies only if they perform public functions i.e. private bodies too could by bound by the Act
It is unlawful under the section 6 of the Human Rights Act 1998 for a public authority to act in a manner which is inconsistent with the European Convention on Human Rights.1 This means that the public authorities must also act in compliance with the Convention Rights. Thus, if a body which is a public body acts in a manner which is not in compliance with the Convention rights then its action can be challenged in the court.
The question then arises that what amounts to ‘public authority’. A terse definition is given by the subsection (3) of the section 6 that public authority includes a court or a tribunal or any person who performs function of a public nature. This therefore turns the arrow towards ‘public functions’ i.e. anyone performing public functions amounts to public body. The question then arises that what is the definition of public functions. This has been defined overtime by the courts and no single definite definition exists in relation to this.
The Joint Committee of House of Lords and House of Commons defined the meaning of Public Authority in their Seventh Report of the 2003-04 Session. The report distinguished between two types of authorities who could be regarded as public authority for the purpose of the Act. First the authorities that are purely public in nature i.e. established by the state such as local councils, tribunals, courts, government departments, police, etc. These authorities are bound by the HRA 1998. Their activities towards the community are public functions so they are bound by the Section 6(3) of the Act to act in a manner which is consistent with the Act. And they are also bound in their private dealings because they are public bodies and the Section 6(1) does not excuse them from compliance if they are acting in private capacity. The report however highlights the binding effect on private bodies only if they perform public functions i.e. private bodies too could by bound by the Act