Murray v. United Kingdom
European Court of Human Rights
Application no. 14310/88 (1994)
- Written by Miller Jozwiak, JD
Facts
Six members of the Murray family (plaintiffs) had their personal information recorded and photographs taken without their knowledge or consent by the British government (defendant). The United Kingdom’s domestic courts upheld the government’s actions as lawful and consistent with domestic law. The Murray family sued the government, claiming that the government had violated Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights (Article 8). The government responded that the actions were justified under Article 8’s exception for lawful measures necessary for the prevention of crime in accordance with the law. Specifically, the government argued that there was honest suspicion linking at least one of the family members to alleged crimes and that the government’s actions were necessary to fight against terrorism in Northern Ireland.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning ()
What to do next…
Here's why 832,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,500 briefs, keyed to 994 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.
