Recommendation 13

As a result of the above and because UK judgments show the detailed judicial reasoning in the judgments: a) Fewer cases from the UK are litigated before the ECtHR than was the case before the HRA; b) ECtHR judges have been able to rely on the reasoning in UK judgments to better understand how the national UK legal systems protect human rights; c) If a case reaches the ECtHR, there is less of a risk of adverse ECtHR judgments arising due to any misunderstanding as to how the domestic legal system protects human rights; d) The margin of appreciation accorded to the UK is significant as there is confidence in the national processes established by the HRA, including the national courts’ role in applying human rights, following careful consideration of any case-law relevant to the case before it; e) Where there are differences of opinion, there are clear and constructive mechanisms (through ‘judicial dialogue’) to resolve any differences of opinion based on misunderstandings.