The ban on hunting with dogs violates the fundamental human rights of thousands of people whose livelihood and way of life revolve around the meet and the chase, the House of Lords heard today.

Richard Gordon, QC, began the latest legal challenge to the 2004 Hunting Act by saying: “There are many for whom hunting is a core part of their lives and the rural communities in which they live."

He added: “The social network of many individuals is made up entirely of those who hunt. The ban jeopardises their social life, working life and family life.”

Between 6,000 and 8,000 were expected eventually to lose their jobs, he said, and many would also lose the homes that went with the jobs. Others would lose businesses and the commercial “goodwill” attached to them.

Mr Gordon contended that the ban, introduced to prevent unnecessary suffering to animals, was a “disproportionate” interference with the rights of individuals under the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR).

These included the right under Article 8 to a private and family life — including, he argued, a way of life of one’s own choosing — and the right to peaceful assembly and freedom of association under Article 11.

Two years ago, the House of Lords rejected an appeal in which the pro-hunt lobby claimed that the Parliament Act, used to force through the Hunting Act, was unconstitutional.

Now campaigners are asking Lord Bingham, Lord Hope, Lord Rodger, Lord Brown and Baroness Hale to overrule a Court of Appeal judgment that dismissed their second challenge to the Hunting Act, in which they invoked human rights laws and European trade laws.

The Countryside Alliance, along with various individuals, say that the Act — which prohibits fox hunting, deer hunting and hare coursing with dogs in England and Wales — should be declared unlawful.

In a hearing set to last until next Wednesday, the Lords will also hear an appeal from the Scottish courts by Brian Friend and Jeremy Whaley, both members of the Union of Country Sports Workers. They also claim that the ban, introduced in Scotland under the Protection of Wild Mammals Act, is an infringement of their human rights.

Explore Law

• Columnists

• Law Panel

• Law Reports

• Student Law

Times Recommends

• Legal school 'earned £1m by exploiting bar course'
• Axe may fall on 5,000 more City lawyers
• Prince Charles named in £81m court battle