This story is unavailable.

By the way, if you are interested in how Human Rights Act is dealt with by the courts, your account focuses on declarations of incompatibility. However, y omit to mention purposive interpretation which is the court’s most powerful weapon. Worth looking at Ghaidan. That was used in Fulton v Bear Scotland as the basis for a *more* interventionist approach by the EAT.

One clap, two clap, three clap, forty?

By clapping more or less, you can signal to us which stories really stand out.