Mandate vs Law Distinction
<p>I have general concerns about government overreach and encroachments upon liberties.
On several occasions during the last two years I've heard people mention that a mandate is not a law.
I'd like to understand the distinction.
I'd also like to know to what extent mandates are enforceable, eg in a court case scenario.
I'm especially interested in the UK, but would also like to understand other countries.</p>

<p>In general, a &quot;mandate&quot; is not a legal term. It can refer to any situation is whch people are &quot;required&quot; to do something, such as wear masks or become vaccinated. A mandate can come from a private business,  that imposes rules on customers; it can come from a business that imposes rules on employees,  it can come from executive action not directly authorized by any law, it can come from a regulation authorized by some law, or be directly imposed by law.</p>
<p>Mandates imposed by law or regulation are likely to be enforceable in court, depending on their exact terms.</p>
<p>Mandates imposed by executive action may perhaps be enforced in court.  Mandates imposed by private businesses can often be enforced by the business ejecting a customer, refusing to deal with an entity that does not comply, or by disciplining or discharging an employee.</p>
<p>In each case the exact terms of the mandate will matter, and may define how it may be enforced.</p>

criminal-law contract-law legal-terms human-rights government