14. Land Law and Human Rights

Land Law ◽  
2020 ◽  
pp. 593-629
Author(s):  
Chris Bevan
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Land Law ◽  
European Court ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Rights Discourse ◽  
Human Rights Discourse ◽  
The Relationship

This chapter examines the relationship between land law and human rights. From a distinctly land law perspective, the human rights discourse has given rise to much debate, which continues to fuel much academic commentary including recent examination of the availability of horizontal effect in McDonald v McDonald in the Supreme Court and in the European Court of Human Rights. The chapter focuses chiefly on the two most pertinent provisions of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) for land law; namely Art. 1 of the First Protocol and Art. 8 and reflects on the, at times, difficult relationship between land law and human rights.

12. Land Law and Human Rights

Land Law ◽  
2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Chris Bevan
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Land Law ◽  
Human Rights Act ◽  
Human Rights Act 1998 ◽  
Rights Discourse ◽  
Human Rights Discourse ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
Domestic Law

This chapter considers the relationship between land law and human rights. From a distinctly land law perspective, the human rights discourse has given rise to much debate, which continues to fuel much academic commentary. The chapter focuses on the key European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) rights incorporated into domestic law by the Human Rights Act 1998 (HRA 1998) — namely, Art. 1 of the First Protocol to the ECHR and Art. 8 of the ECHR. It identifies other Convention rights which exert an influence on land law. It begins with a brief summary of the broader machinery of the HRA 1998.

scholarly journals The Politics of Victimhood in Human Rights Violations: The Case of the Erased Residents of Slovenia

2017 ◽  
Vol 12 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Barbara Gornik
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Former Yugoslavia ◽  
European Convention ◽  
The Political ◽  
Human Rights Violations ◽  
Compensation Scheme ◽  
European Court ◽  
Rights Discourse ◽  
Human Rights Discourse ◽  
Permanent Residents

During the process of gaining national independence the Slovenian government unlawfully erased 25,671 individuals, mainly citizens of other republics of the former Yugoslavia from the Slovenian Register of Permanent Residents. In 2012 the European Court of Human Rights in the case of Kurić and others vs. Republic of Slovenia held that there had been a violation of the 8th, 13th and 14th Articles of the European Convention on Human rights. Following this judgement the Slovenian government adopted a compensation scheme for the Erased introducing the criteria determining conditions for their redress. The article reflects on the political and legal construction of victimhood and reveals the notions of political loyalty, legal conformity and territorial attachment as one of the most decisive elements of victimhood. It shows that the subjectivity of victims in the case of the Erased is not defined within the human rights discourse but is grounded in nationalist terms.

Workers' Rights as Human Rights

2009 ◽  
Vol 34 (1) ◽  
pp. 8-20 ◽  
Author(s):  
Larry Savage
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
Labor Movement ◽  
Court Decisions ◽  
Canadian Society ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Rights Discourse ◽  
Human Rights Discourse ◽  
Traditional Class ◽  
Over Time

In the wake of a series of prolabor Supreme Court decisions in Canada, the mantra of “workers' rights as human rights” has gained unprecedented attention in the Canadian labor movement. This article briefly reviews the Canadian labor movement's recent history with the Supreme Court before arguing that elite-driven judicial strategies, advocated by several academics and Canadian unions, threaten, over time, to depoliticize traditional class-based approaches to advancing workers' rights. The argument is premised on the notion that liberal human rights discourse does little to address the inequalities in wealth and power that polarize Canadian society along class lines.

12 The Supreme Court and the European Convention on Human Rights

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dickson Brice
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
European Commission ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Human Rights Law ◽  
European Court ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Uk Supreme Court ◽  
The Uk ◽  
Proper Account

This chapter examines the engagement of the Irish Supreme Court with the European Convention on Human Rights. It reviews all of the occasions on which decisions of the Supreme Court have been reviewed by the European Commission or Court of Human Rights, cases such as Lawless, Norris, Open Door, Keegan, Heaney, Murphy, Independent News, Bosphorus Airways, McFarlane and O’Keeffe. The argument is made that, like the UK Supreme Court, Ireland’s top court has not been as committed to adopting the ECHR’s standards as it might have been and that the Court is still not adapting its own judgment-writing to take proper account of the jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights. That Court has frequently highlighted the inordinate delays which plagued the Irish Supreme Court in the 1990s. More could be done to integrate the European Court’s thinking into the way the Supreme Court goes about developing Ireland’s human rights law.

scholarly journals The practice of the Supreme Court and the decisions of the European Court concluding violations of artic - le 3 of the Convention

2020 ◽  
pp. 413-417
Author(s):  
Alla Radzivill
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Law Enforcement ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
European Convention ◽  
European Court ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Effective System ◽  
Protection Of Human Rights ◽  
European Standards ◽  
The Right

Law enforcement practice of the Supreme Court in cases involving torture in the light of the standards of the European Court ofHuman Rights. The article is devoted to the study of individual legal positions of the Supreme Court, their coordination with the practiceof the European Court of Human Rights. The author emphasizes that the decisions of the European Court should serve as precedents,which will make it impossible to produce diametrically opposite decisions on similar categories of cases. Analysis of the problem ofcriminal responsibility for torture allows us to form conclusions and suggestions that are important for the development of the theoryof criminal law and the improvement of law enforcement practice.The article deals with the issues related to the peculiarities of the interpretation and application of Article 3 of the European Conventionon Human Rights of the European Court of Human Rights. In particular, the scope of Article 3 has been analyzed; it has been de -fined, what is necessary to understand under concepts of torture, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment. Substantive and proceduralaspects of violations of the prohibition of torture have been revealed, as well as positive and negative obligations of a state to providethe effective protection of the right. The standards of the appropriate assessment of ill-treatment and the main aspects of judicial qualificationof a particular form of mistreatment as torture have been analyzed. The procedural guarantees, which must be provided for each personat the stage of pre-trial investigation, non-observance of which leads to a breach of Article 3 of the Convention, have been determined.Creation of the effective system of protection of human rights and its efficiency is analysed in relation to the crime of “torture”in the context of European Convention on human rights, which must be in future stored and taken for basis for a further improvementand systematization of the single European standards in area of human rights.

What makes a parent in surrogacy cases? Reflections on the Fjölnisdóttir et al. v. Iceland decision of the European Court of Human Rights

2021 ◽  
pp. 096853322110434
Author(s):  
Julian W März
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
Best Interests ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Surrogate Mother ◽  
Commercial Surrogacy ◽  
European Court ◽  
The Supreme Court

The present commentary analyses and discusses the Fjölnisdóttir et al. v. Iceland decision of the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) of 18 May 2021. The case concerned an Icelandic couple who had been recognised as the legal parents of a child born by a surrogate mother in California. In contrast to most other surrogacy cases decided by the ECtHR, however, the child had no biological link to either of the intended parents. The ECtHR thus found that a ruling of the Supreme Court of Iceland which had rejected the recognition of the legal parenthood of the intended parents under Icelandic law had not violated Art. 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights, despite the fact that joint adoption by the intended parents was not possible in this case. The present commentary argues that this decision overexaggerates the importance of the biological link, creating injustices at the expense of the child concerned. In conclusion, the commentary calls for a more consistent and holistic framework to protect the best interests of the child and to prevent abuses of transnational commercial surrogacy.

The Internationalization Of Human Rights And The Importance Of Normative Dialogues Between International And National Courts

2017 ◽  
Vol 17 (2) ◽  
pp. 137
Author(s):  
Mariane Morato Stival ◽  
Marcos André Ribeiro ◽  
Daniel Gonçalves Mendes da Costa
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
The Other ◽  
Human Rights Protection ◽  
Rights Protection ◽  
National Courts ◽  
European Court ◽  
Differences Of Opinion ◽  
Rights Discourse ◽  
Different Characteristics ◽  
Human Rights Discourse

This article intends to analyze in the context of the complexity of the process of internationalization of human rights, the definitions and tensions between cultural universalism and relativism, the essence of human rights discourse, its basic norms and an analysis of the normative dialogues in case decisions involving violations of human rights in international tribunals such as the European Court of Human Rights, the Inter-American Court of Human Rights and national courts. The well-established dialogue between courts can bring convergences closer together and remove differences of opinion on human rights protection. A new dynamic can occur through a complementarity of one court with respect to the other, even with the different characteristics between the legal orders.

Insult of Public Officials

2021 ◽  
pp. 388-409
Author(s):  
Christoph Bezemek
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Human Rights ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
The United States ◽  
Public Officials ◽  
European Court ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Us ◽  
Us Supreme Court ◽  
Structural Differences

This chapter assesses public insult, looking at the closely related question of ‘fighting words’ and the Supreme Court of the United States’ decision in Chaplinsky v New Hampshire. While Chaplinsky’s ‘fighting words’ exception has withered in the United States, it had found a home in Europe where insult laws are widely accepted both by the European Court of Human Rights and in domestic jurisdictions. However, the approach of the European Court is structurally different, turning not on a narrowly defined categorical exception but upon case-by-case proportionality analysis of a kind that the US Supreme Court would eschew. Considering the question of insult to public officials, the chapter focuses again on structural differences in doctrine. Expanding the focus to include the Inter-American Court of Human Rights (IACtHR) and the African Court on Human and Peoples’ Rights (ACtHPR), it shows that each proceeds on a rather different conception of ‘public figure’.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document