A jurisprudence-based analysis of the judiciary's seemingly erroneous anthropomorphizing of commercial entities through self-misconceived perceptions of their statutory obligations under ss 2 and 3, HRA 1998, which might in fact be a clever, mechanically-convenient subterfuge, designed to both: (a) appease and appear to conform to the 'elective dictatorship' of the parliamentary masters; and (b) implement the personal prejudgment of what the individual judge, in good conscience', perceives as being the best interest outcome for the social majority. Irrespective of the reader's philosophical perspective, a more transparent alternative is offered, safeguarding the fundamentally important principle of justice through certainty.
This first part of a two-part article examines all the human rights cases reported in the Lloyd's Law Reports and the All England Law Reports (Commercial) from October 2000 to December 2010, analysing their significance within the evolving modus operandi of the judiciary.
The second part of the article will contain the author's conclusions.
Business Law Review