be drawn between (a) common law rights and Convention rights and between (b)
complaints under RIPA and claims under the HRA assigned by RIPA to the Tribunal.
26. As already noted, it is agreed that the Convention right to privacy cannot be invoked
in respect of pre-HRA conduct, so as to make something that was lawful when it was
done pre-HRA retrospectively unlawful.
27. The tribunal has jurisdiction to consider complaints under s65(4) relating to pre-RIPA
and pre-HRA conduct, subject to the question of extension of time, if the conduct can
be characterised as unlawful at common law, that is the illegality ground of judicial
review. The dispute is, as seen above, whether on arguments based on the principle of
legality, the right to privacy of communications was protected by public law and
whether the principle of proportionality applies.
28. No claim can be made in respect of pre-HRA conduct under s7(l)(a), which is not
retrospective. Such a claim can only be dealt with under the ordinary rules of domestic
public law, such as the head of irrationality
V. OUT OF TIME COMPLAINTS AND CLAIMS AND EXTENSIONS OF TIME.
29.The determination of the Tribunal on this point is that, in respect of conduct occurring
more than 12 months before the complaint and claim were made, they are out of time,
but that an extension of time should be granted under s67(5) RIPA and s7(5) of the
HRA.