Restrictions under Articles 8, 10 and 11 | AQA A-Level Law
For Specification 7162
AQA A-Level Law | Free Revision Notes
Estimated study time: 65 minutes
The rights protected by Articles 8, 10 and 11 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) are important, but they are qualified rights. This means that the State may sometimes lawfully interfere with privacy, expression, assembly or association. These Restrictions under Articles 8, 10 and 11 A-Level Law revision notes explain the permitted purposes listed in Articles 8.2, 10.2 and 11.2 and distinguish them from the rights protected in Articles 8.1, 10.1 and 11.1. AQA specifically requires knowledge of these restrictions before students move on to the general requirements governing their use.
Learning Objectives 🎯
By the end of this revision page, you should be able to:
Explain the restrictions permitted by Article 8.2.
Explain the restrictions permitted by Article 10.2.
Explain the restrictions permitted by Article 11.2.
Distinguish the rights protected by Articles 8.1, 10.1 and 11.1 from the restrictions permitted by their second paragraphs.
Identify an appropriate permitted aim when applying Articles 8, 10 and 11 to factual scenarios.
Avoid confusing the restriction tests under Articles 8, 10 and 11 with the different rules governing Articles 2 and 5.
Revision Notes 📚
Articles 8, 10 and 11 are qualified rights
Articles 8, 10 and 11 do not provide completely unrestricted freedoms.
They protect important rights in their first paragraphs:
Article 8.1 protects private and family life, home and correspondence
Article 10.1 protects freedom of expression
Article 11.1 protects peaceful assembly and association with others.
These rights were considered separately in Article 8: privacy [Lesson 175. Article 8: privacy], Article 10: freedom of expression [Lesson 176. Article 10: freedom of expression] and Article 11: assembly and association [Lesson 177. Article 11: assembly and association].
The second paragraph of each Article then identifies circumstances in which State interference may potentially be justified.
AQA expressly requires:
Article 8.2
Article 10.2
Article 11.2
the general requirements relating to restrictions.
The detailed general requirements are developed in the next lesson, General requirements governing restrictions [Lesson 179. General requirements governing restrictions].
Right, interference and restriction
These three ideas must be kept separate.
The right
The first question is:
What Convention right is the person exercising?
For example, someone publishing a political article is exercising Article 10 freedom of expression.
The interference
The next question is:
What has the public authority done which restricts that right?
For example, preventing publication interferes with Article 10.
The restriction
Finally ask:
Can the State justify that interference under Article 10.2?
AQA's 2025 examiner report praised stronger responses which identified each individual interference and then tested it against the requirements of Articles 10.2 and 11.2.
Interference does not automatically mean violation
This is the central principle of the lesson.
If a public authority interferes with Article 8, 10 or 11, that does not automatically mean the ECHR has been violated.
The State may be able to justify the interference under the second paragraph of the relevant Article.
A useful formula is:
Protected right + State interference + valid justification = potentially lawful restriction
However, merely identifying one of the permitted aims is not enough. The restriction must also satisfy the general requirements, considered in General requirements governing restrictions [Lesson 179. General requirements governing restrictions].
The common structure of Articles 8.2, 10.2 and 11.2
Although their lists of permitted aims are not identical, the three Articles have a very similar basic structure.
A restriction must:
have the required legal basis
pursue one of the permitted aims
satisfy the requirement that the interference is necessary in a democratic society.
AQA examiner reports identify this similarity as important. In 2023, examiners noted confusion among students about the requirements for justified interference and specifically warned that Articles 8, 10 and 11 operate similarly but Articles 2 and 5 are different.
For this lesson, the main focus is the permitted aims. The meaning of the common requirements is developed fully in Lesson 179.
Article 8.2: restrictions on privacy
Article 8.1 protects respect for private and family life, home and correspondence.
Article 8.2 permits State interference with those interests where the required conditions are satisfied and the interference pursues one of the listed aims.
The permitted aims are:
national security
public safety
the economic well-being of the country
the prevention of disorder or crime
the protection of health or morals
the protection of the rights and freedoms of others.
These aims explain why Article 8 cannot create an unrestricted ability to keep all aspects of private life beyond State interference.
Article 8.2 and prevention of crime
One particularly important Article 8.2 aim is the prevention of disorder or crime.
This may become relevant where police action interferes with:
privacy
personal information
correspondence
physical integrity.
Example
Police lawfully investigate a serious offence and obtain information concerning a suspect's private life.
Article 8.1 may be engaged because private information is involved.
However, Article 8.2 may potentially justify interference where it is directed towards the prevention or detection of crime, provided the other requirements governing restrictions are satisfied.
AQA's 2022 examiner report expressly applies Article 8.2 in this way, identifying crime prevention and detection as a potential justification for interference with private life.
Article 8.2 and the rights of others
Article 8.2 also allows interference for the protection of the rights and freedoms of others.
This becomes particularly important where privacy conflicts with freedom of expression.
For example:
one person relies on Article 8 to protect private information
another relies on Article 10 to communicate that information.
Article 8 does not automatically defeat Article 10.
AQA's 2025 examiner report explains that Article 8.2 allows proportionate interference with private life where necessary to protect the rights and freedoms of others, including freedom of expression.
The detailed balance between these rights is developed later in Balancing privacy and expression [Lesson 190. Balancing privacy and expression].
Article 8.2 and health or morals
Another permitted aim is the protection of health or morals.
This means that an interference with private or family life may potentially be justified where it genuinely serves the protection of health or morals and satisfies the remaining requirements.
Do not write that "health or morals" automatically overrides privacy.
It merely provides a permitted purpose capable of supporting a restriction.
Article 8.2 and public safety
Privacy may also potentially be restricted in the interests of public safety.
For example, State action taken to address a genuine danger to members of the public might interfere with a person's private life.
Again, the aim does not automatically make the interference lawful. The remaining restriction requirements must still be satisfied.
Article 8.2 and national security
National security is another permitted justification.
This may potentially support State interference with privacy where national security concerns are genuinely involved.
The important examination technique is to use the aim that actually matches the facts rather than listing every possible Article 8.2 purpose.
Article 8.2 and economic well-being
Article 8.2 uniquely includes the economic well-being of the country among its permitted aims.
This does not appear in the same form in Articles 10.2 or 11.2.
That makes it a useful distinction to remember.
Article 10.2: restrictions on freedom of expression
Article 10.1 protects freedom of expression, including receiving and communicating information and ideas.
Article 10.2 recognises that exercising this freedom carries duties and responsibilities and may therefore be subject to lawful restrictions.
The permitted aims include:
national security
territorial integrity
public safety
the prevention of disorder or crime
the protection of health or morals
the protection of the reputation or rights of others
preventing the disclosure of information received in confidence
maintaining the authority and impartiality of the judiciary.
Article 10 therefore provides broad protection for expression, but not an unrestricted right to say, publish or disclose anything in any circumstances.
Article 10.2 and the reputation of others
A particularly important Article 10.2 aim is the protection of the reputation or rights of others.
This matters where expression harms another person's protected interests.
For example, a newspaper may wish to publish information about someone.
The newspaper has an Article 10 interest in publication, but the individual's Article 8 interests may justify some restriction of that expression.
AQA's 2022 and 2025 examiner reports expressly identify protection of another person's rights or reputation as a legitimate Article 10.2 aim.
Article 10.2 and confidential information
Article 10.2 may also permit restriction for preventing the disclosure of information received in confidence.
This is especially significant where a person wishes to publish material which another person has a legitimate interest in keeping confidential.
AQA's 2023 mark scheme expressly gives this as an example of an Article 10 justification in a privacy and publication problem.
Example
A journalist intends to publish highly personal information obtained from a confidential private communication.
Article 10.1 is engaged because publication is expression.
However, preventing disclosure of confidential information may provide a permitted Article 10.2 purpose for restricting publication.
Whether the restriction is ultimately lawful depends on the wider requirements and the balance between competing rights.
Article 10.2 and disorder or crime
Freedom of expression may also be restricted for the prevention of disorder or crime.
This aim regularly appears in AQA protest scenarios.
A protestor may be expressing a political message under Article 10.1, but police restrictions may potentially be justified where they genuinely seek to prevent disorder or crime.
AQA's 2023, 2024 and 2025 examiner materials repeatedly identify prevention of disorder or crime as a relevant aim when analysing restrictions on protest expression.
Article 10.2 and public safety
Public safety is another important permitted aim.
For example, police might impose restrictions on expressive conduct where circumstances create genuine risks to the public.
In the 2025 examination, AQA identified both public safety and prevention of disorder and crime as relevant aims when considering police restrictions on protest.
Article 10.2 and the judiciary
Article 10.2 additionally recognises restrictions aimed at maintaining the authority and impartiality of the judiciary.
This is a distinctive Article 10 aim.
It reflects the fact that freedom of expression may sometimes interact with the proper functioning of courts and the administration of justice.
Article 10.2 and territorial integrity
Article 10.2 also specifically includes territorial integrity.
This is another useful difference when comparing the permitted aims across Articles 8, 10 and 11.
Article 11.2: restrictions on assembly and association
Article 11.1 protects:
peaceful assembly
association with others.
Article 11.2 permits restrictions where the required conditions are met and the restriction pursues one of the following aims:
national security
public safety
the prevention of disorder or crime
the protection of health or morals
the protection of the rights and freedoms of others.
These restrictions frequently arise in scenarios involving police management of demonstrations and marches.
Article 11.2 and peaceful protest
A crucial point is that an assembly may be peaceful and protected by Article 11.1, but still potentially be subject to a lawful restriction under Article 11.2.
AQA examiners repeatedly emphasise this distinction.
In 2023, the examiner report noted that even an entirely peaceful assembly may potentially be lawfully disbanded where the restriction is justified, with Cisse v France used as supporting authority.
Therefore, do not write:
The protest was peaceful, so police could not legally restrict it.
Instead:
The protest was peaceful and Article 11.1 was therefore engaged. The separate question is whether the police interference can be justified under Article 11.2.
Article 11.2 and prevention of disorder or crime
This is perhaps the most commonly relevant restriction in AQA protest scenarios.
Police may seek to control demonstrations where there is a genuine risk of:
disorder
violence
criminal activity.
However, the existence of some risk does not automatically justify every possible restriction.
The general requirements governing how far police may go are considered in General requirements governing restrictions [Lesson 179. General requirements governing restrictions].
Article 11.2 and public safety
Restrictions may also pursue public safety.
In the 2025 Human Rights examination, restrictions on a protest were considered against aims including public safety and the prevention of disorder and crime.
Example
A peaceful assembly takes place beside a heavily congested road.
Police impose a limited restriction because the number of participants creates a genuine danger to road users and protestors.
Article 11.1 is engaged because the assembly remains peaceful.
Public safety may provide a permitted Article 11.2 aim.
Whether the precise restriction is justified depends on the further requirements considered in Lesson 179.
Article 11.2 and the rights of others
Article 11.2 also allows restrictions for the protection of the rights and freedoms of others.
This is particularly important where a demonstration affects:
property rights
access to premises
the rights of other road users
the freedoms of other members of the public.
AQA's 2023 report applied this aim to protestors who entered private property, identifying the property owner's right to control who entered their land as a relevant competing interest.
Article 11.2 and counter-protests
Care is needed where the danger comes from counter-protesters rather than from the peaceful demonstrators themselves.
The fact that police can restrict assembly to prevent disorder does not mean they should automatically stop the peaceful group whenever opponents threaten violence.
As explored in Article 11: assembly and association [Lesson 177. Article 11: assembly and association], the State may have a positive obligation to facilitate peaceful protest.
This can make the source of the disorder highly important when applying Article 11.2.
Special restrictions under Article 11.2
Article 11.2 also recognises that lawful restrictions may be imposed on the exercise of Article 11 rights by members of:
the armed forces
the police
the administration of the State.
This is specific to Article 11 and is therefore another useful distinction between the three qualified rights.
Comparing the permitted aims
There is substantial overlap between Articles 8.2, 10.2 and 11.2, but the lists are not identical.
Permitted aim | Article 8.2 | Article 10.2 | Article 11.2 |
National security | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ |
Public safety | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ |
Prevention of disorder or crime | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ |
Protection of health or morals | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ |
Protection of rights/freedoms of others | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ |
Economic well-being of the country | ✓ | ||
Territorial integrity | ✓ | ||
Protection of reputation of others | ✓ | ||
Preventing disclosure of confidential information | ✓ | ||
Maintaining authority and impartiality of judiciary | ✓ |
For Article 10, the protection of the rights of others is expressly linked with protection of reputation.
This table is useful for revision, but in an examination you should normally identify the one or two aims actually raised by the facts, rather than reproducing every possible aim.
The most important shared aims
For AQA scenario questions, several aims appear particularly frequently:
prevention of disorder or crime
public safety
protection of the rights and freedoms of others.
These feature repeatedly in AQA mark schemes and examiner reports dealing with protest and privacy scenarios.
Protected rights versus permitted restrictions
Students need to avoid merging the first and second paragraphs of the Articles.
Protected right | Possible restriction |
Article 8.1 protects private life. | Article 8.2 may permit interference to prevent crime. |
Article 10.1 protects political expression. | Article 10.2 may permit interference to protect the rights of others. |
Article 11.1 protects peaceful protest. | Article 11.2 may permit interference to protect public safety. |
This leads to a very useful examination sentence structure:
Article 11.1 is engaged because the group is peacefully assembling. However, the restriction may potentially be justified under Article 11.2 because the police are acting in the interests of public safety.
This is far better than writing:
Article 11 does not apply because public safety is involved.
The right does apply. The public-safety issue concerns whether interference with it is justified.
A permitted aim does not cancel the right
Suppose police restrict a peaceful demonstration because they claim there may be disorder.
Do not reason:
Prevention of disorder is listed in Article 11.2, so there is no Article 11 right.
The correct reasoning is:
Article 11.1 is engaged.
Police action interferes with the right.
Prevention of disorder or crime is a permitted Article 11.2 aim.
The State must still satisfy the general requirements governing restrictions.
This final stage is the focus of General requirements governing restrictions [Lesson 179. General requirements governing restrictions].
The same interference may engage Articles 10 and 11
Restrictions on protests often interfere simultaneously with:
Article 10 freedom of expression
Article 11 peaceful assembly.
AQA's 2025 examiner report praised students who treated a restriction on protest as engaging both rights and then considered Articles 10.2 and 11.2.
Example
Police restrict the number of demonstrators allowed to stand beside a road.
This may interfere with:
their Article 11 right to assemble
their Article 10 right to communicate their protest message.
Public safety and prevention of disorder or crime may be relevant permitted aims under both Articles.
Article 8 and Article 10 may point in opposite directions
Privacy and expression questions can involve two Convention rights pulling in different directions.
For example:
Article 8 protects a person's private information
Article 10 protects a newspaper's freedom to publish.
Each right allows interference in order to protect the other.
AQA's 2025 examiner report explains that:
Article 8.2 permits proportionate interference with privacy to protect the rights and freedoms of others, including Article 10
Article 10.2 permits interference with expression to protect another person's reputation or confidential information.
Neither right automatically wins.
The detailed balancing process is covered in Balancing privacy and expression [Lesson 190. Balancing privacy and expression].
Do not use Articles 8.2, 10.2 or 11.2 for Article 5
This is a recurring examination error.
A student sees State interference with a right and automatically writes:
It must be necessary in a democratic society and pursue a legitimate aim.
That is appropriate to Articles 8, 10 and 11, but Article 5 has a different structure.
AQA's 2025 examiner report specifically criticised students who imported wording from Articles 8.2, 10.2 or 11.2 into Article 5 answers.
Remember:
Article 5 contains specified grounds for deprivation of liberty
Articles 8, 10 and 11 use the qualified-right restriction structure.
Do not use the Article 2 test either
Article 2 is also different.
Article 2.2 uses its own narrow exceptions involving force that is no more than absolutely necessary.
Do not apply:
"absolutely necessary" to Articles 8, 10 and 11
"necessary in a democratic society" as the Article 2.2 test.
AQA's 2023 report expressly identified confusion over the different structures as an area of weakness.
Applying the restrictions to a scenario
At this stage of your learning, use the following structure.
Step 1: identify the protected right
Ask which first paragraph applies:
Article 8.1
Article 10.1
Article 11.1.
Step 2: identify the interference
State exactly what the public authority has done.
For example:
searched a person's private correspondence
prevented publication
limited the number of protestors
ordered an assembly to end.
Step 3: choose the correct second paragraph
Use:
Article 8.2 for interference with Article 8
Article 10.2 for interference with Article 10
Article 11.2 for interference with Article 11.
Step 4: identify the permitted aim
Select the aim which actually fits the facts.
For example:
The restriction on protest may pursue the Article 11.2 aim of preventing disorder or crime because violence has already begun between opposing groups.
This is stronger than listing every Article 11.2 aim.
Step 5: distinguish "possible justification" from "lawful restriction"
Do not conclude that the State wins merely because you have found a permitted aim.
Write:
Prevention of disorder is a permitted Article 11.2 aim, so the interference is capable of justification.
The remaining question is whether the general requirements are met.
Step 6: move to the general restriction test
A complete factual analysis then asks whether the restriction satisfies the requirements studied in General requirements governing restrictions [Lesson 179. General requirements governing restrictions].
Worked example: privacy
Scenario
Police obtain confidential information about Jaya's private life during an investigation into serious fraud.
Application
Article 8.1 is engaged because Jaya's private information is affected.
The police action interferes with her right to respect for private life.
However, prevention of disorder or crime is a permitted aim under Article 8.2.
The interference is therefore capable of being justified. Whether it actually complies with Article 8 depends on the general requirements governing restrictions.
Worked example: expression
Scenario
A journalist intends to publish confidential medical information about another person. A court considers restricting publication.
Application
Article 10.1 is engaged because publication involves freedom of expression.
Article 10.2 allows restrictions for purposes including:
protecting the rights or reputation of others
preventing disclosure of information received in confidence.
Either may therefore provide a permitted aim.
The fact that a permitted aim exists does not automatically make an injunction lawful. The wider requirements governing restrictions must still be applied.
Worked example: assembly
Scenario
One hundred people hold a peaceful roadside protest. Police receive reliable information that the size and position of the gathering is creating a serious danger to traffic. Officers impose a limit on the number who may remain beside the road.
Application
Article 11.1 is engaged because the protest is peaceful.
Article 10.1 may also be engaged because the protestors are communicating their views.
Limiting numbers interferes with both rights.
However:
public safety
and potentially the prevention of disorder or crime
are permitted aims under Articles 10.2 and 11.2.
The restriction is therefore capable of justification.
A complete answer would next examine whether the particular limit satisfies the general restriction requirements.
Key Words 🔑
Key word | Student-friendly definition | How it may be used in an exam |
Qualified right | A Convention right which may lawfully be restricted in specified circumstances. | Explain why interference with Articles 8, 10 or 11 does not automatically amount to a violation. |
Permitted aim | A purpose specifically recognised by the Convention as capable of justifying interference with a qualified right. | Identify the aim relevant to the facts, such as public safety or prevention of crime. |
Public safety | Protection of the public from genuine risks or danger. | Often relevant when restrictions are placed on protests or other public activity. |
Prevention of disorder or crime | A permitted purpose aimed at preventing unlawful conduct or serious disorder. | Commonly applied to police restrictions on expression or assembly. |
Rights and freedoms of others | The Convention interests and other legitimate rights of people affected by another person's exercise of a qualified right. | Apply where privacy, expression, assembly or property interests conflict. |
Hints from the Examiner Reports 💡
Examiner hint: Learn which Articles use this qualified-right structure. The 2023 report identified confusion between the similar requirements of Articles 8, 10 and 11 and the very different structures of Articles 2 and 5.
Examiner hint: Do not merely list every permitted aim. In 2024, most students could identify legitimate aims, but stronger responses selected the aim relevant to the actual facts, such as prevention of disorder or crime.
Examiner hint: Identify each interference separately. AQA's 2025 report praised responses which separately considered the restriction on protest numbers, the instruction to leave and a subsequent arrest under Articles 10.2 and 11.2.
Examiner hint: Remember that a peaceful assembly can still be restricted. The fact that Article 11.1 applies is only the first stage. Article 11.2 may permit interference where its conditions are met.
Examiner hint: In privacy and expression questions, remember that the two rights can justify interference with each other. The 2025 report explains that Article 8.2 can protect Article 10 interests, while Article 10.2 can protect reputation and confidential information.
Examiner hint: Do not stop after naming a permitted aim. Recent examiner reports repeatedly stress that students must go on to consider whether the actual measure satisfies the requirements governing justified interference.
Common Mistakes ⚠️
Mistake: Treating Articles 8, 10 and 11 as absolute rights
Why this is incorrect: Each is a qualified right whose second paragraph expressly allows specified restrictions.
How to improve: Learn the structure: right first, interference second, possible justification third.
Mistake: Saying the right disappears whenever a permitted aim exists
Why this is incorrect: The right remains engaged. A permitted aim merely provides one part of the State's possible justification.
How to improve: Write that the interference is capable of justification, rather than saying the right does not apply.
Mistake: Listing every possible aim without selecting one
Why this is incorrect: This does not apply the law to the scenario.
How to improve: Choose the aim that corresponds to the facts and explain why.
Mistake: Using Article 8.2 to restrict Article 10 directly
Why this is incorrect: Each right has its own second paragraph.
How to improve: Match them correctly: 8.1 with 8.2, 10.1 with 10.2 and 11.1 with 11.2.
Mistake: Applying "necessary in a democratic society" to Article 5
Why this is incorrect: Article 5 contains its own specified grounds for lawful deprivation of liberty.
How to improve: Reserve the qualified-right restriction framework for Articles 8, 10 and 11.
Mistake: Assuming peaceful protest cannot be restricted
Why this is incorrect: Peacefulness establishes that Article 11.1 may protect the assembly. Article 11.2 may still permit a lawful restriction.
How to improve: Separate the scope of Article 11.1 from the justification under Article 11.2.
Exam-Style Questions ✍️
Question 1
Which one of the following is a permitted aim under Articles 8.2, 10.2 and 11.2?
A. Territorial integrity
B. Economic well-being of the country
C. Prevention of disorder or crime
D. Maintaining the authority of the judiciary
[1 mark]
Question 2
State two permitted aims for restricting the right to privacy under Article 8.2.
[2 marks]
Question 3
Identify two purposes contained in Article 10.2 which are particularly relevant to disputes concerning publication of private or confidential information.
[2 marks]
Question 4
Explain the distinction between:
a) a right protected by Article 11.1
b) a permitted restriction under Article 11.2.
[5 marks]
Question 5
A newspaper wishes to publish confidential information about Rowan's personal life. Rowan seeks to prevent publication.
Explain how Articles 8.2 and 10.2 may both be relevant to the dispute.
[5 marks]
Question 6
A peaceful demonstration is taking place outside a government building. Police receive credible evidence that a very large crowd is causing a serious danger to people attempting to cross a nearby road. Officers impose a limit on the number of demonstrators permitted to remain in that location.
Explain which rights and permitted restrictions are relevant.
[5 marks]
Question 7
Police prevent a journalist from publishing an article because it contains information supplied to the journalist in confidence.
Explain how Article 10.2 may apply.
[5 marks]
Question 8
A peaceful campaign group marches through a town carrying political banners. Police alter the route of the march because serious disorder is occurring in the next street and there is a genuine danger to members of the public.
Analyse how Articles 10 and 11 apply to the facts.
[10 marks]
Question 9
A police officer accesses confidential personal information during a criminal investigation. The information concerns the suspect's family relationships and private correspondence.
Analyse how Article 8.1 and Article 8.2 should be distinguished when considering the incident.
[10 marks]
Answers and Indicative Mark Scheme
Question 1
Answer: C, prevention of disorder or crime.
This is a permitted aim under Articles 8.2, 10.2 and 11.2.
[1 mark]
Question 2
Award one mark for each valid Article 8.2 aim, including:
national security
public safety
economic well-being of the country
prevention of disorder or crime
protection of health or morals
protection of the rights and freedoms of others.
Maximum: 2 marks.
Question 3
Award one mark for each:
protection of the reputation or rights of others
prevention of the disclosure of information received in confidence.
Maximum: 2 marks.
Question 4
Indicative content:
Article 11.1 protects freedom of peaceful assembly and association with others.
This determines whether the individual's activity falls within the protected right.
Article 11.2 deals with circumstances in which the State may potentially restrict that right.
Permitted aims include public safety, prevention of disorder or crime and protection of the rights and freedoms of others.
A permitted aim does not mean Article 11.1 ceases to apply.
The right is engaged first and the justification for interference is considered separately.
Maximum: 5 marks.
Question 5
Indicative content:
Rowan's private information engages Article 8.1.
Publication engages the newspaper's Article 10.1 freedom of expression.
Neither right automatically takes priority.
Article 8.2 permits interference with privacy where justified to protect the rights and freedoms of others, potentially including Article 10.
Article 10.2 permits interference with expression to protect another person's reputation or rights.
Article 10.2 may also be relevant where information was received in confidence.
A full decision requires the wider requirements governing restrictions and balancing of the competing rights.
Maximum: 5 marks.
Question 6
Indicative content:
The demonstration is peaceful, so Article 11.1 is engaged.
If the demonstrators are communicating views, Article 10.1 is also engaged.
Restricting numbers interferes with those rights.
Public safety is a permitted aim under Articles 10.2 and 11.2.
Prevention of disorder may also be relevant if supported by the facts.
The existence of this aim makes the interference capable of justification, but does not itself prove the restriction lawful.
The general restriction requirements would still need to be applied.
Maximum: 5 marks.
Question 7
Indicative content:
Publication is protected by Article 10.1 freedom of expression.
Preventing publication interferes with that right.
Article 10.2 permits restrictions aimed at preventing the disclosure of information received in confidence.
This provides a permitted purpose for the restriction.
The restriction is not automatically lawful merely because the information was confidential.
It must also meet the general requirements governing interference with Article 10.
Maximum: 5 marks.
Question 8
Indicative content:
AO1
Article 10.1 protects freedom of expression.
Article 11.1 protects peaceful assembly.
Articles 10.2 and 11.2 permit restrictions for purposes including public safety and prevention of disorder or crime.
AO2
The political banners are Article 10 expression.
The peaceful march is protected by Article 11.1.
Changing the route interferes with both rights.
Serious disorder is occurring nearby.
Members of the public face a genuine danger.
Public safety and prevention of disorder or crime therefore provide relevant permitted aims.
AO3
The existence of these aims means the route restriction is capable of justification.
The rights have not disappeared merely because disorder is present.
A complete conclusion on whether the interference is lawful requires the general restriction requirements covered in General requirements governing restrictions [Lesson 179. General requirements governing restrictions].
The fact that police change the route rather than prevent the protest entirely may become relevant at that later stage.
Maximum: 10 marks.
Question 9
Indicative content:
AO1
Article 8.1 protects private and family life and correspondence.
Article 8.2 permits interference for specified purposes, including prevention of disorder or crime.
AO2
The information concerns family relationships, so Article 8.1 is engaged.
Access to correspondence also engages Article 8.1.
The police investigation therefore interferes with protected Article 8 interests.
However, the action is being carried out during a criminal investigation.
Prevention of disorder or crime is therefore a potentially relevant Article 8.2 aim.
AO3
The correct analysis is not that Article 8 disappears because police are investigating crime.
Article 8.1 establishes the protected right.
Article 8.2 provides a possible justification for interfering with it.
Whether the police interference is actually lawful depends on the general requirements governing restrictions considered in General requirements governing restrictions [Lesson 179. General requirements governing restrictions].
Maximum: 10 marks.
Comments