Remarks by Beth Stephens

2019 ◽  
Vol 113 ◽  
pp. 166-167
Author(s):  
Beth Stephens

Mechanisms to hold corporations liable for human rights abuses are usually grossly inadequate. All too often, local remedies are not available because the host government and legal system are inadequate or captured by corporate interests. The subsidiary directly responsible for the abuses may not have the funds to provide an adequate remedy, and the parent corporation may not be subject to the jurisdiction of local courts. As a result, victims and survivors of abuses have attempted to follow corporate actors to their home states, through human rights litigation in U.S. and European courts. Although such litigation flourished in U.S. courts for two decades, recent Supreme Court decisions have slashed the number of U.S. human rights cases.

Legal Studies ◽  
2013 ◽  
Vol 33 (3) ◽  
pp. 431-454 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sarah Nield ◽  
Nicholas Hopkins

Following the Supreme Court decisions in Manchester CC v Pinnock and Hounslow CC v Powell, this article examines the possible impact of Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms upon protection of the home in creditor repossession proceedings. The central argument advanced is that, although occupiers may not all be protected through property law, they may enjoy an independent right to respect for their home under Article 8, which should be acknowledged in the legal frameworks governing creditor's enforcement rights against the home. The article suggests that the most common creditor enforcement route, through mortgage repossession proceedings, falls short in this regard. It takes as its primary focus the treatment of children in such proceedings to provide an example of the potential for a human rights-based property protection heralded by these two Supreme Court decisions.


Author(s):  
Vladimir Jilkine

The article deals with the basis and procedure for review of court decisions that have entered into force, after the rulings of the European Court of Human Rights on violations of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms in review of the cases by the Supreme Court of Finland, in connection with the decision by which the applicant appealed to The European Court of Human Rights. The author’s analysis and comparison of judicial practice and the European legal system shows that when making decisions, the Supreme Court applies current national constitutional and legislative provisions.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document