quill.gif (3183 bytes)

Powell and Rayner v United Kingdom (1990) 12 EHRR 355

 

Facts: the applicants complained of noise pollution from Heathrow Airport.

Reasoning: The Court held that Article 8 was material, because the quality of their private lives and the scope for enjoying the amenities of their homes had been adversely affected by the noise. However the policy approach and the noise abatement measures put in place by the United Kingdom could not be said to have exceeded its margin of appreciation under Article 8(2), the importance of Heathrow to the British economy being a relevant consideration


 

Human and Constitutional Rights Resource Page


Comparative Bills of Rights ||Environmental Protection