Longlisted for the 2022 Inner Temple Main Book PrizeHuman Rights in the UK and the Influence of Foreign Jurisprudence represents the first major empirical study of the use of foreign jurisprudence at the UK Supreme Court. This book focuses on the patterns of use and non use of rulings from foreign domestic courts in human rights cases before the UK Supreme Court. Results are drawn from quantitative and qualitative research, presenting data from the first eight years of Supreme Court activity. The evidence includes interviews with active and former members of the senior judiciary, as well as a focus group including some of the Supreme Court Judicial Assistants. It is argued that foreign jurisprudence is more intimately woven into the fabric of judicial reasoning, and serves a wider range of functions, than the term 'persuasive authority' might imply. Foreign jurisprudence is used mainly as a heuristic device, providing judges with a fresh analytical lens. Foreign jurisprudence is also important when interpreting a common legislative scheme, supporting dialogue between the Supreme Court and supranational courts such as the European Court of Human Rights. The perspectives offered by foreign jurisprudence can also support a stronger conception of domestic human rights. In these ways, this book addresses a broader political question about the source of human rights in the UK.

Will be of interest to public law and human rights scholars and practising human rights lawyers.

1. IntroductionI. Structure of the BookII. Style2. Research MethodologyI. Research ParametersII. Interviews3. Legitimacy and AuthorityI. Persuasive AuthorityII. The Influence of Domestic v Supranational JurisprudenceIII. Conclusions4. The Purpose of Foreign JurisprudenceI. Many MindsII. DecorationIII. CourtesyIV. SupplementsV. ConsensusVI. Conclusions5. Foreign Jurisprudence in the UK Supreme CourtI. The Extent to Which Foreign Jurisprudence is UsedII. The Individual Approaches of the JusticesIII. Accessing Foreign JurisprudenceIV. The Influence of Common Law JurisdictionsV. The Effect of Changing Judgment StylesVI. Conclusions6. Foreign Jurisprudence as a Heuristic ToolI. Gap FillingII. An Analytical LensIII. ReassuranceIV. Conclusions7. The Pursuit of a Common EnterpriseI. Using Foreign Jurisprudence to Promote UniformityII. Uniformity under the Human Rights ActIII. The Absence of a Supranational CourtIV. Conclusions8. Instrumental Uses of Foreign JurisprudenceI. To Confirm or Bolster ConclusionsII. The Absence of Strasbourg JurisprudenceIII. 'Departing' from StrasbourgIV. Conclusions9. ConclusionsI. An Absence of Guiding PrinciplesII. The Individual Approaches of the JusticesIII. Foreign Jurisprudence as a Heuristic ToolIV. Providing a Given Audience with ReasonsV. The Effect of Changing Working MethodsVI. Reflections on Judicial Reasoning at the Supreme Court