Guzzardi v Italy
The difference between a restriction on freedom of movement and a deprivation of liberty is one of degree or intensity, and confinement to a small part of a remote island was a deprivation of liberty.
Facts
Mr Guzzardi, who was suspected of membership of the Mafia, was placed under special supervision and ordered to live on a small area of the island of Asinara, off Sardinia, for 16 months. The area available to him was about 2.5 square kilometres, he had to report to the authorities twice a day, he could not leave his dwelling at night, and he had few opportunities for social contact. He complained that he had been deprived of his liberty in breach of article 5.
Legal principle
The European Court of Human Rights held that Mr Guzzardi had been deprived of his liberty, and that the deprivation did not fall within any of the permitted grounds in article 5(1), so there was a violation. The court said that the difference between deprivation of and restriction upon liberty is merely one of degree or intensity, and not one of nature or substance, and that the court must look at the concrete situation of the individual, taking account of the type, duration, effects and manner of implementation of the measure. Taken cumulatively, the conditions of his confinement amounted to a deprivation of liberty.
Related cases on slavery, liberty and fair trial (articles 4 to 7)
- Airey v Ireland (1979) 2 EHRR 305
- Al-Khawaja and Tahery v United Kingdom (2012) 54 EHRR 23
- Austin v Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis [2009] UKHL 5, [2009] 1 AC 564
- Brogan v United Kingdom (1989) 11 EHRR 117
- Gillan v United Kingdom (2010) 50 EHRR 45
- Golder v United Kingdom (1979) 1 EHRR 524
- Murray v United Kingdom (1996) 22 EHRR 29
- P v Cheshire West and Chester Council [2014] UKSC 19, [2014] AC 896
Studying human rights law? Our tutors help you understand and apply cases like this in essays, problem questions and exams. Request a quote or browse our law notes.
This summary is for study and revision and is not legal advice. Although our case summaries are checked for accuracy, we do not guarantee that they are free from errors or omissions. Always read the full judgment for the court's reasoning.
