In R (Countryside Alliance) v Attorney
General a unanimous House of Lords upheld the legality of the Hunting Act
2004 in the wake of claims that the Act was an alleged breach of the European
Convention on Human Rights and of the European Community Treaty. In reaching
this conclusion, the Lordships differed in their approaches to both the Human
Rights (HR) and the European Community (EC) claims; however they all concurred
and dismissed both appeals. In a very lengthy judgment, the House of Lords
countenanced one of its first sport-related cases. The House of Lords was
careful to note that the case came before them under their judicial capacity
and not legislative capacity and thus personal views had to be set aside. The
Hunting Act 2004 banned the hunting of wild mammals with hounds in England and
Wales. Unsurprisingly the Act was challenged by those who viewed hunting with
hounds as a core part of their lives and instrumental in forming social
relationships. Hunting with hounds had been
a bastion of rural life for centuries in Britain. As the Scott Henderson
Committee in its Report on Cruelty to Wild Animals concluded “[...]Any
field sport which has a reasonable measure of support and is a traditional
activity of the countryside, and which has some utilitarian value, should not
be interfered with except for some very good reason”.