A quick thread about the legal issues surrounding the imposition of a “quarantine at a hotel” requirement for international travellers. These are initial thoughts: would welcome thoughts and contributions! NB I’m thinking about 🏴󠁧󠁢󠁥󠁮󠁧󠁿 only but this probably applies equally to 🏴󠁧󠁢󠁷󠁬󠁳󠁿.

The basic power is in section 45B of the Public Health (Control of Disease) Act 1984.
Subsection (2)(b) refers to the “detention, isolation, or quarantine of persons”.
So the legal basis looks clear. But regulations will also have to meet requirements of rationality. And since detaining people in a hotel room engages fundamental human rights (Article 5 of the ECHR), HRA tests of proportionality are in play too.
Though NB that Art 5(3)(e) ECHR expressly contemplates lawful detention for the prevention of the spreading of infectious disease.
A couple of issues strike me.
First, the government will need a robust case to explain why isolation at home (eg using apps, geolocation, or even tracking bracelets) is not an acceptable alternative.
There has been some suggestion that the legal powers don’t exist to permit that: but I have to say that I don’t immediately see why it doesn’t fit under (2)(b) - at least as a set of conditions compliance with which are an exception from the requirement to quarantine at a hotel.
(Eg, quarantine in a hotel unless you download the app/keep your phone on and with you at all times/wear a tag).
Another set of issues surrounds this point, from https://t.co/koelqtZELg
As I understand it, the requirement won’t be imposed on eg road hauliers (because our supply chain would collapse if it did). And what about ministers and foreign dignitaries (the G7 is in the UK in June)? But then the logic of the Whitehall official kicks in.
To adopt a metaphor, a requirement to make people stick their fingers in a hole in the dyke and stand there for 2 weeks looks questionable if water is flowing unchecked through another hole in the dyke.
There may be answers to that but they need to be articulated and thought through.
Another issue: Ireland. See earlier short thread. https://t.co/9Rfam0BG0S https://t.co/EV5NCLuDdu
If NI is not being treated as “abroad” for quarantine purposes, what is being done to coordinate quarantine rules with the Irish Government?
Written before I saw this thread: but note the overlap here between the legal issues and the practical issues. https://t.co/OjoZQeYLsE
To put the point shortly: if a : detention in hotel policy is backed by reasoning to show why nothing less intrusive will work, and if it is more than a “something must be done” gesture made pointless because of exceptions, it will probably be legally secure. But those are “ifs”.

More from Legal

These people weren't murdered. They were legally executed after convictions for horrendous crimes, being sentenced to the death penalty, and going through countless appeals.


You can oppose the death penalty as a punishment without pretending that the people executed were victims or that carrying out those executions is comparable to murder.

As an example: Daniel Lee was a white supremacist who murdered a family (including an 8-year-old girl) by suffocating them with bags and then dumping their bodies in a swamp.

That's whose name @CoriBush wants you to remember.

Wesley Purkey admitted to kidnapping, raping, and then murdering a 16-year-old girl named Jennifer Long. He then dismembered her body. He also beat an 80-year-old woman to death.

Maybe we should learn the names of his victims instead, @CoriBush?

Dustin Honken was a meth dealer that murdered 5 people, including 2 girls under the age of 11, because their dad was set to testify against him on drug charges. He was specifically sentenced to death for killing the 2 kids.

You May Also Like

राम-रावण युद्ध समाप्त हो चुका था। जगत को त्रास देने वाला रावण अपने कुटुम्ब सहित नष्ट हो चुका था।श्रीराम का राज्याभिषेक हुआ और अयोध्या नरेश श्री राम के नेतृत्व में चारों दिशाओं में शन्ति थी।
अंगद को विदा करते समय राम रो पड़े थे ।हनुमान को विदा करने की शक्ति तो राम में थी ही नहीं ।


माता सीता भी हनुमान को पुत्रवत मानती थी। अत: हनुमान अयोध्या में ही रह गए ।राम दिनभर दरबार में, शासन व्यवस्था में व्यस्त रहते थे। संध्या को जब शासकीय कार्यों में छूट मिलती तो गुरु और माताओं का कुशल-मंगल पूछ अपने कक्ष में जाते थे। परंतु हनुमान जी हमेशा उनके पीछे-पीछे ही रहते थे ।


उनकी उपस्थिति में ही सारा परिवार बहुत देर तक जी भर बातें करता ।फिर भरत को ध्यान आया कि भैया-भाभी को भी एकांत मिलना चाहिए ।उर्मिला को देख भी उनके मन में हूक उठती थी कि इस पतिव्रता को भी अपने पति का सानिध्य चाहिए ।

एक दिन भरत ने हनुमान जी से कहा,"हे पवनपुत्र! सीता भाभी को राम भैया के साथ एकांत में रहने का भी अधिकार प्राप्त है ।क्या आपको उनके माथे पर सिन्दूर नहीं दिखता?इसलिए संध्या पश्चात आप राम भैया को कृप्या अकेला छोड़ दिया करें "।
ये सुनकर हनुमान आश्चर्यचकित रह गए और सीता माता के पास गए ।


माता से हनुमान ने पूछा,"माता आप अपने माथे पर सिन्दूर क्यों लगाती हैं।" यह सुनकर सीता माता बोलीं,"स्त्री अपने माथे पर सिन्दूर लगाती है तो उसके पति की आयु में वृद्धि होती है और वह स्वस्थ रहते हैं "। फिर हनुमान जी प्रभु राम के पास गए ।