Council of Europe

1950 ◽  
Vol 4 (4) ◽  
pp. 689-694
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Member State ◽  
Civil Procedure ◽  
Press Conference ◽  
Council Of Europe ◽  
Double Taxation ◽  
Standing Committee ◽  
Member States ◽  
The Creation ◽  
The Right

The Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe met for its fifth session in Strasbourg on August 4, 1950 in anticipation of the second session of the Consultative Assembly opening on August 9. At its first meeting the committee discussed the proposed agenda of the Assembly and included on it the following items: 1) a European Charter of Human Rights; 2) a proposal for a convention granting reciprocal treatment of subjects of member states, physical and juridical; 3) uniform civil procedure for member countries; and 4) elimination of double taxation. After the final meeting of the committee on August 9, the chairman of the committee (MacBride, Ireland) announced at a press conference that the ministers had decided to defer until their October meeting decisions on three proposals of the standing committee as the ministers wished to have the further views of the Assembly on them. The General Affairs Committee proposals were: 1) the appointment by each member state of a minister for European affairs to handle Council of Europe matters as a step towards unification; 2) the right of members to accept decisions of the Committee of Ministers in principle but without specific endorsement, to avoid exercise of the veto because of unacceptable details; and 3) the creation of a channel for presentation of the views of the Assembly to the member parliaments for discussion. Mr. MacBride announced at the same press conference that the ministers had decided to hold interim meetings of deputies in order to maintain closer contact with Council proceedings.

scholarly journals The Civil Procedure Aspect of Protection of the Right of the Non-Custodial Parent to Take Part in Child Upbringing. The German Experience

2021 ◽  
Vol 1 ◽  
pp. 52-56
Author(s):  
Olga S. Zharkova ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Scientific Community ◽  
Civil Procedure ◽  
Focus Of Attention ◽  
Council Of Europe ◽  
Civil Process ◽  
The Past ◽  
Custodial Parent ◽  
The Creation ◽  
The Right

The creation of a system of effective legal guarantees of the right of a separately living parent to participate in raising a child has been for many years one of the important, complex tasks of the civil process in Germany in general and enforcement proceedings in particular. This problem is clearly expressed in Russia. The shortcomings of the procedural guarantees of this right are not only sharply outlined in practice, but also are in the focus of attention of the scientific community and attract the attention of human rights bodies of the Council of Europe. This article is devoted to the problems, methods of solution and the goals of the legal transformations of Germany in this area over the past decade.

scholarly journals An Agreement to Disagree: The ASEAN Human Rights Declaration and the Absence of Regional Identity in Southeast Asia

2014 ◽  
Vol 33 (3) ◽  
pp. 107-129 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mathew Davies
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Southeast Asia ◽  
Member State ◽  
Regional Identity ◽  
Member States ◽  
The Future ◽  
The Creation ◽  
Institutional Origins

ASEAN's engagement with human rights culminated in the creation of the ASEAN Human Rights Declaration in 2012. The Declaration is fascinating in three ways: Its institutional origins are surprising, it was agreed upon by states with very different positions on the role of human rights domestically, and it both contains commitments far in advance of some members and is at the same time dangerously regressive. The three leading frameworks that currently interrogate the Declaration fail to provide convincing insights into all three of those dimensions. To correct these shortcomings, this article applies the notion of an “incompletely theorized agreement” to the study of the Declaration, arguing that member states understand the Declaration in very different ways and agreed to it for similarly diverse reasons. Further, I argue that the Declaration neither articulates a shared regional identity relating to respect for human rights, nor can it be understood as marking an early point towards the creation of this identity. Instead, the current diversity of regional opinions on human rights and democracy is perceived as legitimate and will endure. The article concludes by considering whether this denudes the Declaration of value, arguing that its importance will vary: The more progressive the member state, the more important the Declaration will be in the future.

scholarly journals The Council of Europe and Sharia: An Unsatisfactory Resolution?

2019 ◽  
Vol 21 (2) ◽  
pp. 203-212
Author(s):  
Russell Sandberg ◽  
Frank Cranmer
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Democratic Society ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Council Of Europe ◽  
Member States ◽  
Article 9 ◽  
Freedom Of Thought ◽  
The Right

On 22 January 2019, the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe agreed the text of Resolution 2253: Sharia, the Cairo Declaration and the European Convention on Human Rights. The Resolution begins – on an uncontroversial note – by reiterating ‘the obligation on member States to protect the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion as enshrined in Article 9 of the European Convention on Human Rights … which represents one of the foundations of a democratic society’. It then goes on, however, to recall that the Assembly ‘has on several occasions underlined its support for the principle of the separation of State and religion, as one of the pillars of a democratic society’. This statement is not entirely non-contentious: it ignores the situation in several Member States of the Council of Europe and is based more on notions of laÿcitÕ than on the observable facts in countries such as England, Denmark, Finland and Norway that have state Churches. Unfortunately, this simplification and confusion set the tone for what is to follow.

Human Rights

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kenneth Hamer
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Medical Profession ◽  
Professional Associations ◽  
Professional Life ◽  
General Interest ◽  
Specific Character ◽  
Council Of Europe ◽  
Member States ◽  
The Right ◽  
Special Duties

The effect of the disciplinary sanctions in question was to divest the applicants temporarily (A) or permanently (C) of their civil right, within the meaning of Article 6(1), to practise medicine, which they had duly acquired and which allowed them to pursue the goals of their professional life. The right to continue to practise constituted, in the case of the applicants, a private right and thus a civil right within the meaning of Article 6(1), notwithstanding the specific character of the medical profession—a profession that is exercised in the general interest—and the special duties incumbent on its members. In many member states of the Council of Europe, the duty of adjudicating on disciplinary offences is conferred on jurisdictional organs of professional associations. Even in instances in which Article 6(1) is applicable, conferring powers in this manner does not in itself infringe the Convention.

"Learning and living democracy for all". Council of Europe Programme promoting Citizenship and Human Rights Education

CADMO ◽  
2009 ◽  
pp. 47-54
Author(s):  
Yulia Pererva
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
International Cooperation ◽  
International Institutions ◽  
Democratic Citizenship ◽  
Human Rights Education ◽  
Social Rights ◽  
Council Of Europe ◽  
Member States ◽  
Close Cooperation

- Since 1997, the Council of Europe has supported a Project on Education for Democratic Citizenship and Human Rights (EDC/HRE) with the aim of complimenting its treaty related activities in the fields of Human and Social Rights. The article presents the programmes and the initiatives supported and developed by the Council of Europe both at an international and at the national levels as well as the most important adopted texts and publications. It outlines the principles on which partnership and networking are built by the Council of Europe in close cooperation with member states and other regional and international institutions.Keywords human rights education, education for democratic citizenship, international cooperation.

scholarly journals The state liability for damages caused by its judicial authorities

2003 ◽  
Vol 75 (9-10) ◽  
pp. 409-422
Author(s):  
Nikola Mihailović
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
The State ◽  
Point Of View ◽  
Council Of Europe ◽  
Member States ◽  
Legal Provisions ◽  
Fundamental Freedoms ◽  
Protection Of Human Rights ◽  
State Liability ◽  
Domestic Law

A breach of any right or freedom under the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, leads to but is not limited to liability of the State for damages. That liability is much stricter than the State liability for damage provided according to the domestic law provisions currently in force. The current provisions on State liability for the work of its judiciary do not include the damage caused by improper interpretation and application of the relevant legal provisions. In contrast, the liability of the Council of Europe Member States for the damage caused by their judicial and other authorities, through the breach of the human rights and fundamental freedoms guaranteed by the Convention includes their liability for improper interpretation and application of the relevant provisions of the Convention. That liability is so strict that it in fact comes equal to no-fault liability, from the point of view of its legal consequences. This is so, although it is regulated only as a presumed liability for which there are no grounds of limitation. As a result, two systems of liability for damage caused by judicial authorities will exist in our State Union and in its member states, after the ratification of the aforementioned Convention: liability pursuant to the domestic legal provisions and liability pursuant to the Convention. For that reason, a reform of the provisions on liability is necessary, which will lead to tightening of liability for damage caused by judiciary pursuant to the domestic rules. How to achieve this is a separate issue, which will not be discussed on this occasion.

While the Treaty does not affect the existence of intellectual property rights, there are nonetheless circumstances in which the exercise of such rights may be restricted by the prohibitions laid down in the treaty. 2. Article 36 permits exceptions to the free movement of goods only to the extent to which such exceptions are necessary for the purpose of safeguarding the rights that constitute the specific subject-matter of the type of intellectual property in question. Perhaps the main advantage of this formula, apart from the fact that it narrows the scope of the exceptions permitted by Article 36, is that it allows subtle distinctions to be made depending on the type of intellectual property in issue. 3. The exclusive right conferred on the owner of intellectual property is exhausted in relation to the products in question when he puts them into circulation anywhere within the Common Market. Spelt out more fully, ‘the proprietor of an industrial or commercial property right protected by the legislation of a Member State may not rely on that legislation in order to oppose the importation of a product which has lawfully been marketed in another Member State by, or with the consent of, the proprietor of the right himself or person legally or economically dependent on him’. The expression ‘industrial and commercial property’ clearly embraces patents and trademarks. It also extends to such specialised areas as plant breeders’ rights. The court has held that copyright can also be a form of industrial or commercial property because it ‘includes the protection conferred by copyright, especially when exploited commercially in the form of licences capable of affecting distribution in the various Member States of goods incorporating the protected literary or artistic work’. The principle that the Treaty does not affect the existence of industrial and commercial property rights is derived from Article 222 of the treaty. This provides that ‘the treaty shall in no way prejudice the rules in Member States governing the system of property ownership’. Consequently intellectual property rights are unaffected by the provisions of the treaty unless they hinder free movement or offend the rules of competition. In Keurkoop v Nancy Kean (see below) the design of a handbag which was manufactured in Taiwan was registered in the Benelux countries but without the authority of the actual author. In Case 78/70, Deutsche Grammophon v Metro-SB Grossmärkte [1971] ECR 487, [1971] CMLR 631, the European Court stated:

1997 ◽  
pp. 110-114
Keyword(s):  
Intellectual Property ◽  
Property Rights ◽  
Member State ◽  
Intellectual Property Rights ◽  
Free Movement ◽  
Member States ◽  
Commercial Property ◽  
European Court ◽  
The Right ◽  
Exclusive Right

Part II The Member State Reports on Transposition of the Directive, 16 Spain

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marcos Francisco
Keyword(s):  
Member State ◽  
Dispute Resolution ◽  
Alternative Dispute Resolution ◽  
Competition Law ◽  
Civil Procedure ◽  
General Overview ◽  
Full Compensation ◽  
The Right

This chapter examines the transposition of the Antitrust Damages Directive in Spain. It begins with a general overview of the transposition process, focusing on the Transposition Decree that inserts new articles in the Defence Competition Act of 2007 and in the Civil Procedure Act. It then describes the material, territorial, and temporal scope of the Transposition Decree before analysing the main issues concerning antitrust damages claims affected by the Transposition Decree or that may be relevant in future actions for damages, such as those relating to the jurisdiction of competent courts to decide damages claims based on infringements of competition law, the right to full compensation, joint and several/parental liability, passing-on of the harm and claims by indirect purchasers/suppliers, the limitation period for bringing damages claims, the use of alternative dispute resolution procedures, measures to facilitate claims, and collective claims and consumer redress.

Right of Exit and Entry

2019 ◽  
pp. 89-112
Author(s):  
Elspeth Guild ◽  
Steve Peers ◽  
Jonathan Tomkin
Keyword(s):  
Member State ◽  
Free Movement ◽  
Legal Requirements ◽  
Member States ◽  
Permanent Residence ◽  
The Right

This chapter examines the right of exit and entry provided for in the citizens’ Directive. Articles 4 and 5 of Directive 2004/38 affirm the right of Union citizens and members of their family to leave their Member State of origin and to enter any other Member State of their choosing. As such, these Articles constitute a ‘gateway’ for the exercise of rights of residence and rights of permanent residence provided for in the Directive. In addition to affirming the right of free movement, Articles 4 and 5 specify the administrative documentation and procedures governing travel between Member States. However, there have been significant failures to transpose these provisions correctly, with some Member States imposing exit controls on their own citizens, while some Member States blatantly ignore the clear legal requirements of the Directive.

4. Overriding Objective and Human Rights

2021 ◽  
pp. 32-47
Author(s):  
Stuart Sime
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Family Life ◽  
Freedom Of Expression ◽  
Civil Procedure ◽  
Fair Trial ◽  
Civil Litigation ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Procedural Law ◽  
Civil Proceedings ◽  
The Right

This chapter discusses the sources of procedural law, the general principles relevant to civil procedure established by the overriding objective, the European Convention on Human Rights, and some rules on how the courts approach construing the Civil Procedure Rules 1998 (CPR). The CPR and practice directions (PDs) are the procedural rules governing civil proceedings. The most important rule is the ‘overriding objective’ of dealing with claims justly and at proportionate cost. The most important Convention rights in civil litigation are the right to a fair trial, the right to respect for private and family life, and the right to freedom of expression.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document