Knowledge

Handyside v United Kingdom

Source 📝

57:
Its chapter on pupils contained a 26-page section concerning "Sex". Handyside sent out several hundred review copies of the book, together with a press release, to a selection of publications from national and local newspapers to educational and medical journals. He also placed advertisements for the
61:
On 31 March 1971, 1,069 copies of the book were provisionally seized together with leaflets, posters, showcards, and correspondence relating to its publication and sale. On 1 April 1971, 139 more copies were seized. About 18,800 copies of a total print of 20,000 copies were missed and subsequently
69:
issued two summonses against Handyside for having in his possession obscene books for publication for gain. Handyside ceased distribution of the book and advised bookshops accordingly but, by that time, some 17,000 copies were already in circulation.
29:
Freedom of expression ... is applicable not only to 'information' or 'ideas' that are favourably received or regarded as inoffensive or as a matter of indifference, but also to those that offend, shock or disturb the State or any sector of the
54:, written by Søren Hansen and Jesper Jensen and published, as of 1976, in Denmark, Belgium, Finland, France, West Germany, Greece, Iceland, Italy, the Netherlands, Norway, Sweden, and Switzerland, as well as several non-European countries. 119:
By reason of their direct and continuous contact with the vital forces of their countries, State authorities are in principle in a better position than the international judge to give an opinion on the exact content of these
201: 186: 181: 216: 211: 88:
had adopted its report on the case, finding no violations of Convention rights, and specifically articles 10, 17, and P1-1 by a majority (no violation of article 18 was found unanimously).
206: 127:
The court had also held unanimously that Handyside's property rights (article 1 of protocol 1) were not violated. Judge M. Zekia filed a concurring opinion in this question.
226: 73:
On 1 July 1971, Handyside was found guilty of both offences and fined £25 on each summons and ordered to pay £110 costs. His appeal was rejected.
124:
Judge H. Mosler disagreed and filed a dissenting opinion, considering that violation did take place due to interference not being necessary.
66: 231: 115:. Importantly, the case bore considerable development for the doctrine of the margin of appreciation. The Court reasoned: 112: 85: 40:
Nevertheless, the court did not find for the applicant, who had been fined for publishing a book deemed to be obscene.
108: 166: 22: 50: 221: 100: 146:
From Your Gods to Our Gods: A History of Religion in Indian, South African, and British Courts
104: 162: 8: 103:
doctrine, the court held by thirteen votes to one that the interference in Handyside's
91:
In 1976, court's chamber relinquished jurisdiction in favour of the plenary court.
58:
book. The book became subject of extensive press comment, both favourable and not.
48:
Richard Handyside, proprietor of "Stage 1" publishers, purchased British rights of
195: 165: at para. 48, (1976) 1 EHRR 737, ECHR 5493/72 (7 December 1976), 76: 202:
Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 of the European Convention on Human Rights
217:
European Court of Human Rights cases involving the United Kingdom
212:
European Court of Human Rights cases decided by the Grand Chamber
25:
in 1976. Its conclusion contains the famous phrase that:
107:
was both prescribed by law, having a legitimate aim and
207:
Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights
77:
Proceedings before the European Court of Human Rights
187:Report of the European Commission of Human Rights 81:The application was lodged by Handyside in 1972. 193: 111:, thus there was no violation of article 10 227:Freedom of expression in the United Kingdom 143: 194: 148:. Eugene: Cascade Books. p. 234. 21:(5493/72) was a case decided by the 137: 86:European Commission of Human Rights 13: 14: 243: 175: 109:necessary in a democratic society 232:1976 in United Kingdom case law 167:European Court of Human Rights 152: 23:European Court of Human Rights 1: 130: 35:Paragraph 49 of the judgment 7: 94: 10: 248: 159:Handyside v United Kingdom 18:Handyside v United Kingdom 51:The Little Red Schoolbook 43: 144:Ventura, Marco (2014). 122: 101:margin of appreciation 38: 163:[1976] ECHR 5 117: 105:freedom of expression 27: 67:magistrates' court 239: 169: 156: 150: 149: 141: 36: 247: 246: 242: 241: 240: 238: 237: 236: 192: 191: 178: 173: 172: 157: 153: 142: 138: 133: 97: 79: 46: 37: 34: 12: 11: 5: 245: 235: 234: 229: 224: 219: 214: 209: 204: 190: 189: 184: 182:ECtHR judgment 177: 176:External links 174: 171: 170: 151: 135: 134: 132: 129: 96: 93: 78: 75: 65:On 8 April, a 45: 42: 32: 9: 6: 4: 3: 2: 244: 233: 230: 228: 225: 223: 222:Obscenity law 220: 218: 215: 213: 210: 208: 205: 203: 200: 199: 197: 188: 185: 183: 180: 179: 168: 164: 160: 155: 147: 140: 136: 128: 125: 121: 120:requirements. 116: 114: 110: 106: 102: 92: 89: 87: 84:In 1975, the 82: 74: 71: 68: 63: 59: 55: 53: 52: 41: 31: 26: 24: 20: 19: 158: 154: 145: 139: 126: 123: 118: 98: 90: 83: 80: 72: 64: 60: 56: 49: 47: 39: 28: 17: 16: 15: 30:population. 196:Categories 131:References 99:Using the 95:Judgment 33:—  62:sold. 161: 44:Facts 113:ECHR 198::

Index

European Court of Human Rights
The Little Red Schoolbook
magistrates' court
European Commission of Human Rights
margin of appreciation
freedom of expression
necessary in a democratic society
ECHR
[1976] ECHR 5
European Court of Human Rights
ECtHR judgment
Report of the European Commission of Human Rights
Categories
Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 of the European Convention on Human Rights
Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights
European Court of Human Rights cases decided by the Grand Chamber
European Court of Human Rights cases involving the United Kingdom
Obscenity law
Freedom of expression in the United Kingdom
1976 in United Kingdom case law

Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.