HUMAN RIGHTS CASE LAW OF THE EUROPEAN COURT OF JUSTICE JANUARY 2000 TO MARCH 2001

Abstract In the late 1950 s René Savatier foretold that the qualification of economic value itself as property (bien) would have been the ultimate evolution of the theory of property rights. This prediction has come true with regard to the case law of the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) and the European Court of Justice (CJEU). This paper investigates the implications of the understanding of property developed by the two European Courts on the concept of expropriation itself as well as for the principles governing expropriation law. Hence, the paper illustrates the role played by both the ECtHR and the CJEU in laying down the parameters of legitimacy for national law, including property law. Within this context, the focus falls on cases in which the Courts characterize the facts as deprivation of property requiring for compensation, even though the relevant property could not be the object of expropriation under the domestic law of the defendant State. My contribution brings new insights into the current transformation of the traditional property categories and suggests the reinterpretation of some key concepts of expropriation law.

Download Full-text

Ne Bis Interpretatio In Idem?The Two Faces of theNe Bis In IdemPrinciple in the Case Law of the European Court of Justice

German Law Journal ◽

10.1017/s2071832200021866 ◽

2017 ◽

Vol 18 (1) ◽

pp. 39-58 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

Alessandro Rosanò

Keyword(s):

European Union ◽

Human Rights ◽

Case Law ◽

European Court Of Justice ◽

Antitrust Law ◽

The European Union ◽

Court Of Justice ◽

European Court ◽

Ne Bis In Idem ◽

Regional Custom

The meaning ofidemin thene bis in idemprinciple is controversial in the case law of the Court of Justice of the European Union. In interpreting the provision of Article 54 of the Convention Implementing the Schengen Agreement, the court has emphasized the necessary requirement in the identity of the material acts while in antitrust law three requirements have been deemed necessary: (1) Identity of the facts, (2) unity of offender, and (3) unity of the legal interest protected. Despite the opinions of some Advocates General, the court has confirmed different interpretations of the same principle, depending on differences of the legal scope in question. A few years ago, however, the European Court of Human Rights proclaimed the criterion based on the identity of the material acts as the most suitable. This might push the Court of Justice of the European Union to correct its position in the antitrust field. Should this happen, this adjustment might serve as grounds to recognize the existence of a regional custom concerning thene bis in idemprinciple.

Download Full-text

(In)certezze giuridiche sulla situazione della Crimea: una «mappa» dei casi pendenti o decisi davanti alle corti europee

Eurasiatica - L’Ucraina alla ricerca di un equilibrio ◽

10.30687/978-88-6969-382-3/004 ◽

2019 ◽

Author(s):

Sara De Vido

Keyword(s):

Human Rights ◽

International Law ◽

Case Law ◽

Current Situation ◽

European Court Of Justice ◽

Court Of Justice ◽

European Court

The purpose of this chapter is to analyse the case of Crimea from an international law perspective, by reflecting on the numerous pending cases in front of the European Court of Human Rights and on two cases decided by the European Court of Justice. The chapter will not take a position on the legitimacy or not of the facts that led to the current situation. It will rather focus on the current de facto situation, case law, and on two pivotal notions in international law: sovereignty and jurisdiction.

Download Full-text