scholarly journals Between facts and norms: Testing compliance with Article 8 ECHR in immigration cases

2019 ◽  
Vol 37 (2) ◽  
pp. 157-177
Author(s):  
Mark Klaassen
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Human Rights ◽  
Family Life ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Best Interests ◽  
Primary Role ◽  
European Court ◽  
The Right ◽  
Compliance Tests

The European Court of Human Rights plays a subsidiary role in the protection of the rights and freedoms set forth in the Convention. To enable national authorities to perform their primary role, it is important that the Court offers sufficient guidance on the interpretation of the Convention. It has already been argued that the case law of the Court on the right to respect for family life in immigration cases, lacks consistency in terms of procedural and substantive protection. The inconsistency in the case law is mostly the case in the admission and regularisation case law. This manifests itself in specific issues including the determination of whether an interference has occurred as well as the court’s determination of the best interests of the child. Consequently, the case law difficult to apply by national authorities which leads to widely diverging practices by the Contracting Parties. The objective of this article is to outline the differences and inconsistencies in the different forms of immigration cases and the corresponding compliance tests of the Court. The article aims to offer a solution that would enable both the Court and the Contracting Parties to differentiate the level of protection that is offered by Article 8 in immigration cases, while providing sufficient guidance to national decision-making authorities and judiciaries so that they can efficiently and effectively exercise the primary role they play in the protection of the right to respect for family life in immigration cases.

scholarly journals The principle of the best interests of the child in the expulsion case law of the European Court of Human Rights: Procedural rationality as a remedy for inconsistency

2019 ◽  
Vol 37 (1) ◽  
pp. 50-68 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mathieu Leloup
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Family Life ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Best Interests ◽  
Critical Examination ◽  
Procedural Rationality ◽  
Procedural Approach ◽  
European Court ◽  
The Subject ◽  
The Right

According to Article 3 CRC, the best interests of the child should be a primary consideration in all actions concerning children. This article examines how the European Court of Human Rights applies this principle in expulsion cases that have an impact on the right to family life. A distinction is made between the cases where the expulsion measure is aimed at one of the parents and the cases where the child itself is the subject of the impugned decision. A critical examination of the available case law proves that the Court’s use of the principle is inconsistent in several areas. It is argued that the Court should adopt a procedural approach towards the principle. This would make the case law more consistent, while simultaneously increasing the children’s protection.

Reconstructing the European Court of Human Rights’ Article 8 Jurisprudence in Deportation Cases: The Family’s Right and the Public Interest

2020 ◽  
Vol 20 (2) ◽  
pp. 333-360
Author(s):  
Jonathan Collinson
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Public Interest ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Best Interests ◽  
European Convention ◽  
The Public ◽  
European Court ◽  
Two Factors ◽  
The One ◽  
The Right

Abstract This article rationalises the case law of the European Court of Human Rights under Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights in deportation cases involving children. The Court engages in a balancing exercise between the right to family life of the deportee’s family on the one side, and the public interest in deportation on the other. This article expands on existing case law analysis by suggesting that in deportation cases, the Court considers Article 8 as a form of commonly held right, rather than an individual right held by one member of the family. Furthermore, the balance is argued to be constructed as a relationship between two factors on both sides, rather than of a sole factor on either side as being determinative. This article concludes that the best interests of the child (one of the ‘Üner criteria’) is not adequately reflected in the Court’s deportation decision-making practice.

scholarly journals papel del artículo 8 CEDH en la construcción del margen de apreciación nacional y la doctrina de las obligaciones positivas del Estado

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lara Redondo Saceda
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Family Life ◽  
Case Law ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Derechos Humanos ◽  
European Court ◽  
Margin Of Appreciation ◽  
The Right

El artículo 8 del Convenio Europeo de Derechos Humanos –que protege los derechos al respeto la vida privada y familiar, el domicilio y la correspondencia– se ha configurado en estos setenta años de Convenio como uno de los escenarios habituales del desarrollo del margen de apreciación nacional y la doctrina de las obligaciones positivas del Estado. Esto parece justificarse en el contenido y estructura de este artículo y en las restricciones y limitaciones al ejercicio de estos derechos establecidas por su párrafo segundo. En este marco, el objetivo de este artículo es analizar cuál ha sido el papel del artículo 8 CEDH en el desarrollo de estos estándares interpretativos y cómo ha influido en la jurisprudencia del Tribunal Europeo de Derechos Humanos. Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights –which protects the right to respect for private and family life, home and correspondence– has been configured as a traditional place for the development of the margin of appreciation and the doctrine of State’s positive obligations. The scope and structure of this article and its limitation clause in the second paragraph seem to justify these developments. In this context, the objective of this article is to analyse the role of Article 8 ECHR in the development of these interpretative standards and its influence in the European Court of Human Rights case-law.

scholarly journals RESTRICTIONS OF THE RIGHT TO LIBERTY

2020 ◽  
Vol 73 (12) ◽  
pp. 2915-2920
Author(s):  
Valentina I. Borisova ◽  
Yurii M. Zhornokui ◽  
Larysa V. Krasytska
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Research Methods ◽  
Mentally Ill ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Legal Regulation ◽  
Best Interests ◽  
Involuntary Admission ◽  
European Court ◽  
Special Scientific ◽  
The Right

The aim: To determine the grounds of involuntary admission of a mentally ill person in the context of the possibility to restrict his or her right to liberty. Materials and methods: The authors have studied and analyzed international legal acts, legislation of certain countries, judgments of the European Court of Human Rights, case law on involuntary admission of a mentally ill person by using philosophical, general and special scientific research methods. Conclusions: The imperfection of the legal regulation of relations concerning the involuntary admission of a mentally ill person leads to illegal restriction of the personal right to liberty. It has been proven that involuntary admission and restriction of the freedom of a mentally ill person can be justified, if we take into account the requirement of “therapeutic necessity” for a mentally ill person, the requirement of protecting the rights of others and guaranteeing their safety, the requirement of ensuring the best interests of a mentally ill person.

The Right to Family Life in the Case Law of the European Court of Human Rights

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Petra Kotková ◽  
Milan Palásek
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Family Life ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Same Sex ◽  
Same Sex Couples ◽  
European Court ◽  
The Right ◽  
Relationship Of

The paper deals with the case law of the European Court of Human Rights relating to cohabitation and other law aspects with this institute related. Attention will be focused particularly to clarification of cohabitation in relationship of marriage or relationship of same-sex couples, especially in connection with Art. 8 and 14 of the Convention.

scholarly journals To the question of the peculiarities of the protection of family rights of persons who are married or other family unions in the practice of the european court of human rights

2021 ◽  
pp. 119-123
Author(s):  
R. Havrik
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Family Life ◽  
Legal Status ◽  
Family Relationship ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Scientific Article ◽  
Same Sex ◽  
European Court ◽  
The Right ◽  
Relationship Of

In the scientific article the author conducted a scientific study of the protection of family rights of persons who are married or other family unions in the case law of the European Court of Human Rights, in particular such family unions as de facto marriage, separation, civil partnership, we come to the following conclusions. This legal status is recognized by the European Court of Human Rights as conferring the right to protection against interference with family life, ie it is a family, similar to how a family arises as a result of a registered marriage. In this case, according to the court, the concept of "family" includes the actual family relationship, when the parties live together outside of marriage. A child born as a result of such a relationship is a member of the family from birth and due to the fact of birth. There is a connection between a child and his or her parents that is equivalent to family life, even if at the time of his or her birth the parents no longer lived together or their relationship has ended. Cohabitation is usually a prerequisite for family life, but in exceptional cases, other factors may indicate that specific relationships are stable enough to be considered as actual family ties. Another type of family union - marriage during the period of separate residence of the spouses, in the case law of the European Court of Human Rights is somewhat weak and usually concerns the possibility to use the procedure of separation, but the court recognizes that the spouses have an inalienable right to initiating such a procedure. Until 2010, the European Court of Human Rights generally showed a rather restrained attitude towards this type of relationship as same-sex, not recognizing them as family, but after 2010, given the rapid liberalization of the prevailing public morality regarding same-sex relations in Europe, the European Court on human rights could not deny that the relationship of such couples is essentially "family life".

Towards a Uniform and Informed Interpretation of the Best Interests of the Child by the Judiciary: Inter-American and European Jurisprudence

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-24
Author(s):  
Susana Sanz-Caballero
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
United Nations ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Best Interests ◽  
Rights Of The Child ◽  
European Court ◽  
Critical Form ◽  
The United Nations ◽  
The Right ◽  
Judicial Remedies

This article analyses the interpretations made by two regional human rights courts regarding the best interests of the child. In cases of controversy, it is for the judges to decide how, or whether, the best interests of the child should be applied. Due to the dependence and vulnerability of children, judicial remedies are a critical form of redress when children’s rights are violated. This article analyses case law from two regional courts (the Inter-American Court of Human Rights (ICtHR) and the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR)). The purpose of this analysis is twofold: first of all to see how the two courts interpret and apply the concept; and secondly, to ascertain whether there are similarities of interpretation or common grounds of understanding between the two courts, with particular regard to General Comment No. 14 (GC 14) of the United Nations Committee on the Rights of the Child on the right of the child to have their best interests taken as a primary consideration.

THE RIGHT TO RESPECT FOR CORRESPONDENCE IN UNDERSTANDING THE PRACTICE OF THE EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yevhen Bilousov ◽  
◽  
Nataliia Kordii ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Family Life ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Private Life ◽  
Scientific Article ◽  
Professional Activities ◽  
European Court ◽  
Protection Of Human Rights ◽  
The Individual ◽  
The Right

Article 8 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights is called "the right to respect for private and family life", thus establishing at the international level the legal basis for the exercise of the right to privacy. From the content of this article it follows that this right has four components: private and family life, correspondence and housing. The scientific article is devoted to the study of the right to respect for correspondence under Art. 8 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms. From the literal interpretation of the convention provisions and as evidenced by the case law of the European Court of Human Rights, the implementation of the studied law goes beyond the private life of the individual and acquires special features of its implementation in other spheres of life, such as professional activities. The author analyzes the case law of the European Court in order to identify, generalize and structure the components (content) of the concept of "correspondence", given the possibility of practical use of such information due to the fact that when considering a particular application, the Court assesses whether and types of applied means of communication. This scientific article examines the implementation of the right to correspondence in civil and criminal law, which indicates the gradual expansion of the relevant regulations to different types of legal relations. In examining this issue on the basis of convention provisions and analysis of the case law of the Court, the author has studied and presented in a generalized form the grounds for lawful interference with the right to respect for correspondence.

scholarly journals The Uncertain Place of the Child’s Best Interests in ECtHR’s Immigration Case Law

2020 ◽  
Vol 20 (2) ◽  
pp. 93-112
Author(s):  
Jennie Edlund ◽  
Václav Stehlík
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Family Life ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Best Interests ◽  
Immigration Law ◽  
European Convention ◽  
European Court ◽  
Migration Control

Summary It has been highlighted that in the area of immigration law the protection offered by the European Convention of Human Rights (ECHR) to children and family life is arguably at its weakest. The European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) immigration case law on Article 8 ECHR has shown an uneven and uncertain application of the child’s best interests. Little significance is attached to the child’s respect for family life when determining whether the immigration measure is compatible with the ECHR. This paper will explore how the Court is identifying the best interests of the child and analyse what weight the Court apportions to the best interests of the child when balancing the state’s and the applicant’s interests. It will also examine whether the Court priori-tize migration control over the child’s best interests in cases where both family matters and immigration matters are involved.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document