7.1 Article 3
Human Rights Act 1998, Sch 1, art 3 — No one shall be subjected to torture or to inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment. The right is absolute, but the minimum severity threshold is demanding and context-sensitive. Official source
Severe, prolonged and knowingly unaddressed conditions may engage Article 3, especially where dependence, vulnerability, humiliation and serious physical or psychological effects are established. It is an overstatement to say that every shortfall in social care is automatically inhuman or degrading treatment. The analysis requires severity, state knowledge, causation, available measures and the whole factual setting.
7.2 Article 4
Human Rights Act 1998, Sch 1, art 4 — Prohibits slavery, servitude and forced or compulsory labour, subject to defined exclusions. The state may have duties to maintain an adequate legal framework, protect where there is credible risk and investigate credible allegations. Official source
Article 4 is potentially relevant to coerced unpaid work or sexual exploitation, but only serious exploitation falls within it. The court examines menace of penalty, voluntariness, coercion, deception, abuse of vulnerability, control, duration and the ability in practice to leave. Ordinary family assistance, voluntary unpaid work or an unpleasant bargain is not automatically forced labour.
7.3 Article 8
Human Rights Act 1998, Sch 1, art 8 — Protects private and family life, home and correspondence. It encompasses personal autonomy, physical and psychological integrity, relationships and participation, but interferences may be justified if lawful, necessary and proportionate. Official source
Article 8 supports careful attention to autonomy, dignity, communication and remaining at home. It does not establish an unrestricted right to a preferred package. A structured proportionality analysis asks what right is affected, how severely, what legitimate aim is pursued, whether the measure is rationally connected, whether a less intrusive effective measure exists, and whether a fair balance has been struck.
7.4 Article 5 and false imprisonment
Human Rights Act 1998, Sch 1, art 5 — Protects liberty and security, limits the grounds on which liberty may be taken, and requires a speedy route to challenge detention. In disability-care cases, the legal focus is often whether arrangements amount to confinement and whether they are lawfully authorised and reviewed. Official source
False imprisonment at common law requires complete restraint on freedom of movement and absence of lawful justification. Article 5 deprivation of liberty is a related but distinct public-law and human-rights inquiry. A person who can move around a placement may still be deprived of liberty if subject to continuous supervision and control and not free to leave; but dissatisfaction with a care package or inability to leave home because support is insufficient does not, without more, prove state detention.