‘Context is Everything’: Public Functions and the Human Rights Act 1998: An Analysis of Sammut and Tortoise Media

  • Erin Ferguson* (Corresponding Author)
    • *Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review

Abstract

Reflects on the courts' approach in Sammut v Next Steps Mental Healthcare Ltd (KBD) and R. (on the application of Tortoise Media Ltd) v Conservative and Unionist Party (CA) to interpreting "functions of a public nature" when determining which private bodies are subject to the Human Rights Act 1998.
Cases cited
Sammut v Next Steps Mental Healthcare Ltd [2024] EWHC 2265 (KB); [2025] P.I.Q.R. P1; [2024] 9 WLUK 10 (KBD)
R. (on the application of Tortoise Media Ltd) v Conservative and Unionist Party [2025] EWCA Civ 673; [2025] 1 W.L.R. 4186; [2025] 5 WLUK 393 (CA (Civ Div))
Legislation cited
Human Rights Act 1998 (c.42)
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)1-7
Number of pages7
JournalPublic Law
Volume2026
Issue numberJan
Publication statusPublished - 12 Jan 2026

UN SDGs

This output contributes to the following UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)

  1. SDG 3 - Good Health and Well-being
    SDG 3 Good Health and Well-being
  2. SDG 16 - Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions
    SDG 16 Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions

Keywords

  • Human Rights Act 1998
  • public functions
  • privatisation
  • outsourcing
  • public-private divide

Access to Document

  • Ferguson_PL_Analysis_Public_Functions_HRA_AAM

    This manuscript has been made open access under a Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) licence under the terms of the University of Aberdeen Research Publications Policy. (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/)

    Accepted author manuscript, 162 KBLicence: CC BY

    Fingerprint

    Dive into the research topics of '‘Context is Everything’: Public Functions and the Human Rights Act 1998: An Analysis of Sammut and Tortoise Media'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.
    View full fingerprint

    Cite this