Tom Zwart, The Admissibility of Human Rights Petitions. The Case Law of the European Commission of Human Rights and the Human Rights Committee. International Studies in Human Rights, volume 36. Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, Dordrecht/Boston/London, 1994, 246 pages.

1996 ◽  
Vol 65 (1) ◽  
pp. 151-153
Author(s):  
MATTI PELLONPÄÄ
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
European Commission ◽  
Case Law ◽  
International Studies

Integrating Environmental Values into the European Convention on Human Rights

1995 ◽  
Vol 89 (2) ◽  
pp. 263-294 ◽  
Author(s):  
Richard Desgagné
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
International Law ◽  
European Commission ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Environmental Values ◽  
Private Life ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Environmental Concerns ◽  
Protection Of Human Rights ◽  
Water Treatment Station

Over the last two decades, the protection of the environment has become a necessity so widely recognized that environmental concerns have pervaded most fields of international law, including the international law of human rights. In 1976 the European Commission of Human Rights dismissed an application on the ground that “no right to nature conservation [was] as such included among the rights and freedoms guaranteed by the Convention and in particular by Arts 2, 3, or 5.” In 1993, however, the Commission found that the erection and operation of a waste and water treatment station near the domicile of the applicant was such a nuisance as to amount to a violation of her right to a private life. This development in the case law of the European Commission reflects a growing awareness of the links between protection of human rights and protection of the environment.

The Margin of Appreciation Doctrine in the Jurisprudence of Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights

1998 ◽  
Vol 16 (1) ◽  
pp. 41-61 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yutaka Arai
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
European Commission ◽  
Case Law ◽  
The Other ◽  
European Convention ◽  
National Sovereignty ◽  
Member States ◽  
Uniform Approach ◽  
Margin Of Appreciation ◽  
Socioeconomic Diversity

The margin of appreciation is a measure of discretion allowed to the Member States in the manner that they implement the standards of the European Convention on Human Rights, taking into account their national particular circumstances. Both the European Commission and Court of Human Rights are entrusted with the balancing between the Europe-wide ‘uniform’ approach on one hand and the need to defer to the national sovereignty and to various local values deriving from cultural, religious, and socioeconomic diversity on the other. By analysing the interplay between strictness of scrutiny and the width of the margin of appreciation in the case-law of Article 8, the author attempts to identify the underlying policy grounds for the margin of appreciation under Article 8. He argues that there are certain policies which affect the judicial self-restraint and those which uphold the active review in the jurisprudence of Article 8.

scholarly journals Staying the Return of Aliens from Europe through Interim Measures: The Case-law of the European Commission and the European Court of Human Rights

2011 ◽  
Vol 13 (1) ◽  
pp. 31-51 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yves Haeck ◽  
Clara Burbano Herrera
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Medical Treatment ◽  
European Commission ◽  
Death Penalty ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Life Imprisonment ◽  
Political Activities ◽  
Clear Tendency ◽  
European Court ◽  
Interim Measures

AbstractThe Strasbourg case-law demonstrates a clear tendency to protect aliens through interim measures in case of imminent deportation. Usually but not uniquely those persons claim(ed) before the supervisory organs to be in a situation of extreme gravity in case of forcible return to their country of origin because they can be subject to the death penalty, life imprisonment, persecution for their political activities, deprived of medicine/adequate medical treatment. This contribution explores which typologies of cases have led the European Commission and Court to apply interim measures in those situations, as well as which rights and freedoms have been protected thereby.

scholarly journals A Critical Analysis Of The Work Of The European Commission And European Court Of Human Rights In Relation With Non-Compliance Of Interim Measures - Period 1957-2011

2012 ◽  
Vol 7 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Clara Burbano Herrera
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
European Commission ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Daily Basis ◽  
Member States ◽  
Founding Fathers ◽  
Supervisory System ◽  
European Court ◽  
Negative Effect ◽  
Interim Measures

<p style="text-align: justify;"><strong>Abstract</strong></p><p style="text-align: justify;">Today, interim measures have a key role in many of the cases that are brought before the European Human Rights System. The instrument has been designed to preserve and protect rights and freedoms to persons in a situation of extreme gravity and urgency, together with the interests of the parties in a case before the Court. This legal figure has been applied – nowadays – on a daily basis for more than half a century, first by the former European Commission on Human Rights (European Commission or Commission) and later by the European Court of Human Rights (European Court, Court or ECtHR).</p><p style="text-align: justify;">Despite the fact that interim measures have over time acquired a growing importance in the case law, States when faced with such a measure requiring them to act, sometimes refuse to abide by them. This contribution aims to give an exhaustive overview of the State incompliances. It is argued that the number of non-compliances is steadily growing, as is the number of perpetrators, not only among the ‘new’ Member States, but also among the ‘older’ member States and even the ‘founding fathers’ and that this can have a negative effect on the supervisory system as a whole. Some initiatives can, however, be taken by the European Court and the Committee of Ministers to improve and streamline the procedure with regard to interim measures, whereby all actors in the dispute may benefit.</p>

The right to appeal to the European Court of Human Rights

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yuliya Samovich
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Legal Regulation ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Educational Organizations ◽  
European Court ◽  
Protection Of Human Rights ◽  
Judicial Procedure ◽  
The Right ◽  
Judicial Protection

The manual is devoted to making individual complaints to the European Court of human rights: peculiarities of realization of the right to appeal, conditions of admissibility and the judicial procedure of the European Court of Human Rights. The author analyses some “autonomous concepts” used in the court's case law and touches upon the possibility of limiting the right to judicial protection. The article deals with the formation and development of the individual's rights to international judicial protection, as well as the protection of human rights in universal quasi-judicial international bodies and regional judicial institutions of the European Union and the Organization of American States. This publication includes a material containing an analysis of recent changes in the legal regulation of the Institute of individual complaints. The manual is recommended for students of educational organizations of higher education, studying in the areas of bachelor's and master's degree “Jurisprudence”.

Standardy należytego uzasadnienia w świetle orzecznictwa Trybunału Konstytucyjnego i Europejskiego Trybunału Praw Człowieka

2014 ◽  
pp. 33-48
Author(s):  
Przemysław Florjanowicz-Błachut
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Human Rights ◽  
Due Process ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Fair Trial ◽  
Fundamental Rights ◽  
European Convention ◽  
European Court ◽  
Judicial Reasoning ◽  
The Right

The core function of the judiciary is the administration of justice through delivering judgments and other decisions. The crucial role for its acceptance and legitimization by not only lawyers, but also individulas (parties) and the hole society plays judicial reasoning. It should reflect on judge’s independence within the exercise of his office and show also judicial self-restraint or activism. The axiology and the standards of proper judicial reasoning are anchored both in constitutional and supranational law and case-law. Polish Constitutional Tribunal derives a duty to give reasoning from the right to a fair trial – right to be heard and bring own submissions before the court (Article 45 § 1 of the Constitution), the right to appeal against judgments and decisions made at first stage (Article 78), the rule of two stages of the court proceedings (Article 176) and rule of law clause (Article 2), that comprises inter alia right to due process of law and the rule of legitimate expactation / the protection of trust (Vertrauensschutz). European Court of Human Rights derives this duty to give reasons from the guarantees of the right to a fair trial enshrined in Article 6 § 1 of European Convention of Human Rights. In its case-law the ECtHR, taking into account the margin of appreciation concept, formulated a number of positive and negative requirements, that should be met in case of proper reasoning. The obligation for courts to give sufficient reasons for their decisions is also anchored in European Union law. European Court of Justice derives this duty from the right to fair trial enshrined in Articles 6 and 13 of the ECHR and Article 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union. Standards of the courts reasoning developed by Polish constitutional court an the European courts (ECJ and ECtHR) are in fact convergent and coherent. National judges should take them into consideration in every case, to legitimize its outcome and enhance justice delivery.

Rola uzasadnienia sądowego w realizacji prawa do rzetelnego procesu sądowoadministracyjnego– standard strasburski

2014 ◽  
pp. 13-31
Author(s):  
Katarzyna Grzelak-Bach
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Legal Reasoning ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Legal Order ◽  
European Court ◽  
Protection Of Human Rights ◽  
Judicial Proceedings ◽  
Court Proceedings ◽  
Basic Level

Following a brief introduction of article 6 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, the author begins by analyzing case law from the European Court of Human Rights regarding the legal reasoning in judicial proceedings. The main premise of this paper is to present a formula for preparing legal reasoning in administrative court proceedings. The author draws attention to the role of judges who, in the process of adjudication, should apply creative interpretation of the rules of law, when they see errors or omissions in legislative provisions, or blatant violations of the European legal order. The conclusion of those deliberations finds, that the process of tailoring the approach to meet Strasbourg’s requirements should, on a basic level, be at the discretion of judges rather than the legislators.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document