UK Inquiry Tracker

Proposal for a draft Human Rights Act 1998 (Remedial) Order 2025

Human Rights (Joint Committee) Closed Remedial order scrutiny

Opened: 23 Jul 2025 Closed: 13 May 2026 Parliament page

Background Section 9(3) of the Human Rights Act 1998 provides that in proceedings under that Act in respect of a judicial act done in good faith, damages may not be awarded except in two circumstances. The first is to compensate a person to the extent required by Article 5(5) of … Read more Background Section 9(3) of the Human Rights Act 1998 provides that in proceedings under that Act in respect of a judicial act done in good faith, damages may not be awarded except in two circumstances. The first is to compensate a person to the extent required by Article 5(5) of the European Convention on Human Rights (‘ECHR’) (deprivation of liberty). The second is to compensate a person for a judicial act that is incompatible with Article 6 ECHR (right to fair trial) in circumstances where the person is detained and, but for the incompatibility, the person would not have been detained or would not have been detained for so long. In the case of Re W (A Child) [2016] EWCA Civ 1140, the Court of Appeal found that accusations of professional misconduct against a witness made by a Family Court judge breached her rights under Article 8 of the ECHR (right to respect for private life). In its judgment of 22 June 2021 in SW v United Kingdom (Application no. 87/18), the European Court of Human Rights held that there had been a violation of Article 13 of the ECHR (right to an effective remedy), because the effect of section 9(3) of the Human Rights Act 1998 was that the witness could not bring a claim for damages in respect of a judicial act that was incompatible with Article 8. Government proposals On 17 July 2025, the Government laid before both Houses of Parliament its proposal for a Remedial Order to amend the Human Rights Act 1998. The proposed order is intended to give effect to the judgment of the European Court of Human Rights in SW v United Kingdom , by remedying the incompatibility of section 9(3) of the Human Rights Act 1998 with Article 13 of the ECHR. The Government proposes to address this incompatibility by amending section 9(3) to allow damages to be awarded to compensate a person for a judicial act on an additional basis: that the judicial act is incompatible with Article 8 on the ground that it was done in such a procedurally defective way as to amount to a breach of the requirements of procedural fairness under that Article. Section 9(3) of the Human Rights Act 1998 was previously amended by the Human Rights Act 1998 (Remedial) Order 2020 to give effect to the judgment of the European Court of Human Rights in the case of Hammerton v United Kingdom (Application no. 6287/10). See the Fifteenth Report of the Joint Committee on Human Rights of Session 2017-19, and its Second Report of Session 2019-21. Remedial Orders Section 10 of the Human Rights Act 1998 gives Ministers of the Crown the power to make remedial orders. The section applies if it appears to the Minister that, having regard to a finding of the European Court of Human Rights in proceedings against the United Kingdom, a provision of legislation is incompatible with an obligation of the United Kingdom arising from the Convention. In those circumstances, the Minister may by order make such amendments to the legislation as the Minister considers necessary to remove the incompatibility, if the Minister considers that there are compelling reasons for doing so. Reporting on the proposal The Joint Committee on Human Rights is required to report to Parliament on any proposal for a remedial order to be made under the Human Rights Act 1998. The Committee has 60 sitting days to report to each House its recommendation whether a draft order in the same terms as the proposal should be laid before the House. Show less

2 Recommendations

12 Conclusions

2 Reports

Activity timeline 2 events

22 Jun
2026

Report published

1st Report - Draft Human Rights Act 1998 (Remedial) Order: Judicial Immunity: Second Report

27 Oct
2025

Report published

8th Report - Proposal for a Remedial Order to amend the Human Rights Act 1998: Judicial Immunity

Reports 2 reports · click to expand

Title	HC No.	Published	Items	Response
1st Report - Draft Human Rights Act 1998 (Remedial) Order: Judic…	HC 325	22 Jun 2026	8	No response document linked
8th Report - Proposal for a Remedial Order to amend the Human Ri…	HC 1406	27 Oct 2025	6	No response document linked

Recommendations & Conclusions

14 results

1 Conclusion

8th Report - Proposal for a Remedi…

In our view, the power in section 10 can in principle be used to amend...

In our view, the power in section 10 can in principle be used to amend provisions such as section 9(3) of the Human Rights Act 1998 which are not integral to the mechanisms by which the Act gives effect to … Read more

Ministry of Justice

View details

2 Conclusion

8th Report - Proposal for a Remedi…

The Committee agrees with the Government that it is appropriate to rectify the incompatibility as...

The Committee agrees with the Government that it is appropriate to rectify the incompatibility as expeditiously as possible. Although Article 13 will only rarely require damages to be awarded as a result of judicial acts, it is undesirable that there … Read more

Ministry of Justice

View details

3 Conclusion

8th Report - Proposal for a Remedi…

The Committee accepts that this is not a case where it would be appropriate to...

The Committee accepts that this is not a case where it would be appropriate to use the urgent procedure. (Conclusion, Paragraph 51)

Ministry of Justice

View details

4 Conclusion

8th Report - Proposal for a Remedi…

Subject to our wider concerns about the approach taken by the order, the Department should...

Subject to our wider concerns about the approach taken by the order, the Department should address the specific drafting points that we have identified. (Recommendation, Paragraph 60) Does the proposed order address the incompatibility?

Ministry of Justice

View details

5 Conclusion

8th Report - Proposal for a Remedi…

The Committee considers that, in the light of the judgments of the European Court of...

The Committee considers that, in the light of the judgments of the European Court of Human Rights in the Hammerton and SW cases, it cannot realistically be argued that section 9(3) would be compatible with Article 24 13 if it … Read more

Ministry of Justice

View details

6 Conclusion

8th Report - Proposal for a Remedi…

It is not tenable to continue making piecemeal amendments to section 9(3) in response to...

It is not tenable to continue making piecemeal amendments to section 9(3) in response to the facts of individual cases. The remedial order should therefore be amended either to create principled exceptions to section 9(3), or to remove the provision … Read more

Ministry of Justice

View details

1 Conclusion