III Trust Arbitration as a Matter of National Law, 10 Trust Arbitration in England and Wales: The Trust Law Committee

Author(s):  
Herbert Mark

This chapter examines the strategy being adopted in England and Wales to enable the arbitration of trust disputes to be introduced, and the steps that have already been taken in that direction. One particular obstacle to progress in Britain is Article 6.1 of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, which requires that everyone’s civil rights and obligations be determined by way of a public hearing, whereas arbitrations are traditionally confidential and heard in private. The chapter asks whether legislation is truly necessary in order to achieve trust arbitration, and this leads to a longer exploration of Article 6.1 and its importance in the context of trust arbitration. It concludes with a final rhetorical question: is the required legislation achievable in a manner compatible with Article 6.1?

Author(s):  
Ruslana Liashenko ◽  
Myroslav Dobrovinsky

The article presents the results of theoretical and practical research of the interpretation of the European Convention for the Protectionof Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms in the light of modern concepts of legal understanding.On July 17, 1997, Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine ratified the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and FundamentalFreedoms of 1950 (hereinafter – the Convention), which was the initial stage in the formation and development of Ukrainianlaw and legal science in general. From that moment, a new stage began – the introduction of legal practice and legal values of Europeinto Ukrainian law.The Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, as a complex mechanism has a direct effectwithin the jurisdiction of the Ukrainian court system, the principles of interpretation of the Convention applied by the European Courtof Human Rights are valuable and special for judges in Ukraine. One of the main methods of interpreting the Convention is the principleof judicial precedent. Judicial case law is an important part of the legal system of common law states, and the increase in the boundariesof judicial precedent has been observed in Western Europe over the past century. The case law of the European Court of Human Rightsis an additional factor for the official recognition of judicial precedent as a source of law in the protection of human rights, which willhelp strengthen the independence of the judiciary in Ukraine. Nowadays, the use of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms in Ukraine makes it possibleto replace the prevailing positivist views on law, apply the latest principles of interpretation of human and civil rights, and developthe constitutional jurisprudence of fundamental human rights.The Convention opens a new horizon of tasks in the development of democracy in Ukraine, with the basic principles of whichvarious legal acts of the country must be monitored for compliance with fundamental human rights and freedoms.Through the interpretation and use of the Convention, our state has begun a rapid process of moving away from the positivistunderstanding of law, which has resulted in the emergence of the necessary for the further development of pluralism of legal understandingof law.


Author(s):  
Ruslana Liashenko ◽  
Myroslav Dobrovinsky

The article presents the results of theoretical and practical research of the interpretation of the European Convention for the Protectionof Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms in the light of modern concepts of legal understanding.On July 17, 1997, Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine ratified the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and FundamentalFreedoms of 1950 (hereinafter – the Convention), which was the initial stage in the formation and development of Ukrainianlaw and legal science in general. From that moment, a new stage began – the introduction of legal practice and legal values of Europeinto Ukrainian law.The Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, as a complex mechanism has a direct effectwithin the jurisdiction of the Ukrainian court system, the principles of interpretation of the Convention applied by the European Courtof Human Rights are valuable and special for judges in Ukraine. One of the main methods of interpreting the Convention is the principleof judicial precedent. Judicial case law is an important part of the legal system of common law states, and the increase in the boundariesof judicial precedent has been observed in Western Europe over the past century. The case law of the European Court of Human Rightsis an additional factor for the official recognition of judicial precedent as a source of law in the protection of human rights, which willhelp strengthen the independence of the judiciary in Ukraine. Nowadays, the use of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms in Ukraine makes it possibleto replace the prevailing positivist views on law, apply the latest principles of interpretation of human and civil rights, and developthe constitutional jurisprudence of fundamental human rights.The Convention opens a new horizon of tasks in the development of democracy in Ukraine, with the basic principles of whichvarious legal acts of the country must be monitored for compliance with fundamental human rights and freedoms.Through the interpretation and use of the Convention, our state has begun a rapid process of moving away from the positivistunderstanding of law, which has resulted in the emergence of the necessary for the further development of pluralism of legal understandingof law.


2020 ◽  
Vol 54 (1) ◽  
pp. 487-502
Author(s):  
Renata Bjelica

The right to an oral public hearing is covered by the right to a fair trial as a right guaranteed by the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms as well as by the Constitution of the Republic of Serbia. In this sense, the Law on Administrative Disputes prescribes a rule for the court to establish the facts at an oral public hearing. This law prescribes exceptions to the rule, as well as cases in which the court will "always" and in which it is "obliged" to hold an oral public hearing. Analyzing the legal provisions, with reference to the relevant administrative and constitutional caselaw, and considering the present organization and capacity of the administrative judiciary, the author pointed to certain shortcomings of legislative solutions and administrative judicial decisions, and based on the conclusions drawn, tried to offer possible solutions so that, when it comes to holding a hearing before a court, a higher degree of fairness of trial could be achieved.


2014 ◽  
Vol 1 (2) ◽  
pp. 130-147
Author(s):  
Kevin Aquilina

This paper attempts to answer whether section 24(2) of the Maltese Official Secrets Act conforms, or is in conflict, with the right to a public hearing under section 39(3) of the Constitution of Malta and Article 10(1) of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms. It reviews case law of the European Court of Human Rights on the right to a public hearing and concludes that Strasbourg case law has developed to allow restrictions upon this right even if they are not written down in this Convention. On the other hand, from a comparative exercise carried out with seven similar laws to the Maltese Official Secrets Act, it transpires that the Maltese provision is unique, does not find any counterpart in these seven laws surveyed and, worse still, appears to conflict with Article 6, paragraph 1, of the European Convention.


2021 ◽  
Vol 1 (12) ◽  
pp. 7-18
Author(s):  
Rebkalo M.M. ◽  
◽  
Oliinyk V.S. ◽  

In the recent period of Ukrainian history, scholars pay attention to the discussion of the relationship between Ukrainian constitutional law and the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms and the place of rulings and decisions of the European Court of Human Rights in the legal system of Ukraine. The analysis of the provisions of the European Convention on Human Rights and current Ukrainian legislation is made in the article. It is made in order to determine the impact of this act of the Council of Europe on the constitutional law of Ukraine. It is noted that the Convention plays an important role in the process of protection of human rights and freedoms in Ukraine and has an impact on the implementation of the rule of law, which relate to individual’s constitutional status. It is noted that the European Convention significantly increases the level of the effectiveness of constitutional human rights legislation. The role of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and the European Court of Human Rights in the formation and activity of the Constitutional Court of Ukraine has been determined. The thesis that within the ratio of the Convention and Ukrainian law, the supremacy of the latter within the national legal system does not eliminate the need to comply with international obligations is substantiated in the article. The grounds for restricting human and civil rights and freedoms in accordance with the requirements of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and the constitutional legislation of Ukraine are considered in the article. In order to ensure national security, the restriction of human and civil rights and freedoms in a state of martial law and emergency is analyzed. By introducing martial law and a state of emergency, it is possible to concentrate temporarily all the levers of control over the individual’s status by coercive means within the framework of official power. The conclusion that the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms and the case law of the European Court of Human Rights have had a significant impact on the formation and development of human and civil rights and freedoms as basic, value priorities of the constitutional law of Ukraine is substantiated in the article. Key words: constitutional law, sources of law, Council of Europe, Constitution of Ukraine, Constitutional Court of Ukraine, Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, European Court of Human Rights.


2019 ◽  
Vol 34 (5) ◽  
pp. 1439-1444
Author(s):  
Miodrag N. Simović ◽  
Marina M. Simović ◽  
Vladimir M. Simović

The paper is dedicated to ne bis in idem principle, which is a fundamental human right safeguarded by Protocol No. 7 to the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms. This principle is sometimes also referred to as double jeopardy.The principle implies that no one shall be liable to be tried or punished again in criminal proceedings under the jurisdiction of the same State for an offence for which s/he has already been finally convicted or acquitted (internal ne bis in idem principle), and that in some other State or before the International Court (ne bis in idem principle in respect of the relations between the states or the State and the International Court) the procedure may not be conducted if the person has already been sentenced or acquitted. The identity of the indictable act (idem), the other component of this principle, is more complex and more difficult to be determined than the first one (ne bis).The objective of this principle is to secure the legal certainty of citizens who must be liberated of uncertainty or fear that they would be tried again for the same criminal offence that has already been decided by a final and binding decision. This principle is specific for the accusative and modern system of criminal procedure but not for the investigative criminal procedure, where the possibility for the bindingly finalised criminal procedure to be repeated on the basis of same evidence and regarding the same criminal issue existed. In its legal nature, a circumstance that the proceedings are pending on the same criminal offence against the same accused, represents a negative procedural presumption and, therefore, an obstacle for the further course of proceedings, i.e. it represents the procedural obstacle which prevents an initiation of new criminal procedure for the same criminal case in which the final and binding condemning or acquitting judgement has been passed (exceptio rei iudicatae).The right not to be liable to be tried or punished again for an offence for which s/he has already been finally convicted or acquitted is provided for, primarily, by the International Documents (Article 14, paragraph 7 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and Article 4 of Protocol No. 7 to the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms). The International framework has also been given to ne bis in idem principle through three Conventions adopted by the Council of Europe and those are the European Convention on Extradition and Additional Protocols thereto, the European Convention on the Transfer of Proceedings in Criminal Matters, and the European Convention on the International Validity of Criminal Judgments.Ne bis in idem principle is traditionally associated with the right to a fair trial under Article 6 of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms. Likewise, no derogation from Article 4 of Protocol No. 7 shall be made under Article 15 of the Convention at the time of war or other state of emergency which is threatening the survival of the nation (Article 4, paragraph 3 of Protocol No. 7). Thereby it is categorised as the irrevocable conventional right together with the right to life, prohibition of torture, prohibition of slavery, and the legality principle. Similarly, ne bis in idem principle does not apply in the case of the renewed trials by the International criminal courts where the first trial was conducted in some State, while the principle is applicable in the reversed situation. The International Criminal Tribunal for Former Yugoslavia could have conducted a trial even if a person had already been adjudicated in some State, in the cases provided for by its Statute and in the interest of justice.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document