scholarly journals The Peculiarities of Private and Family Life Protection: The Experience of the European Court of Human Rights

2021 ◽  
Vol 7 (2) ◽  
pp. 39-45
Author(s):  
Oksana MELENKO ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Family Life ◽  
Private Life ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Council Of Europe ◽  
European Court ◽  
Essential Questions ◽  
The Public Sphere ◽  
The Uk ◽  
The Right

One of the most vulnerable spheres of life of any individual is his / her private and family life. Therefore, this issue could not slip the attention of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms of 1950 (hereinafter - the Convention) (Council of Europe, 1950). In fact, there have always been some prejudices within this issue, as it is not a secret that accusations of violating an individual’s right to privacy often provoke discussion in the public sphere. For example, when the UK Special Forces eliminated three terrorists (who were no longer resisting) on the territory of Gibraltar (Case of McCann and Others v. the United Kingdom, 1995), the media did not particularly intend to protect the right to life of these criminals. On the other hand, quite a few liberal media sources have resonantly responded to the interference with private life, when a group of stockbrokers and bankers were prosecuted for sadomasochism in a private residence. A similar behavior of the press was observed when discussing the mandatory use of seat belts. However, when considering the issues related to the violation of Article 8 of the Convention (Council of Europe, 1950), it is important to find answers to a few rather essential questions: Has there been an interference with private life under Article 8 § 1 of the Convention (Council of Europe, 1950)? If so, then – Is this interference sufficiently justified in the light of Article 8 § 2 of the Convention (Council of Europe, 1950), namely: Was the interference lawful? If yes, then – Did the interference have a lawful purpose? If yes, then – Was the interference necessary for a democratic society (can it be regarded as an adequate response to socially urgent necessity)? In case there arises a question concerning state’s positive obligations, it will no longer belong to the jurisdiction of paragraph 2, but will touch upon the analysis of the issue whether state’s positive obligation exists at all.

6. Right to family and private life

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bernadette Rainey
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Private Life ◽  
European Convention ◽  
The Right To Privacy ◽  
European Court ◽  
Margin Of Appreciation ◽  
Human Rights Act ◽  
Definition Of ◽  
The Uk ◽  
The Right

Each Concentrate revision guide is packed with essential information, key cases, revision tips, exam Q&As, and more. Concentrates show you what to expect in a law exam, what examiners are looking for, and how to achieve extra marks. This chapter focuses on the right to family and private life, which is considered a qualified right. It discusses Article 8, which has been developed to expand protection of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) through wide definitions and use of positive obligations. It also considers the European Court of Human Rights’ (ECtHR) definition of private life and application of the living instrument principle to include areas such as sexuality and the environment. In addition, the chapter explains the use of the proportionality and margin of appreciation doctrines when examining the justification of an interference with the right to family and private life, and finally, looks at the development of the right to privacy in the UK via the Human Rights Act 1998 (HRA).

scholarly journals MARRIAGE AND FAMILY LIFE IN THE JURISPRUDENCE OF THE EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS

2014 ◽  
Vol 8 (4) ◽  
pp. 58-63
Author(s):  
Oana Ghiţă
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Family Life ◽  
Private Life ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Public Authorities ◽  
Marriage And Family ◽  
National Courts ◽  
Constitutional Principle ◽  
European Court ◽  
The Right

The article 8 and 12 – European Convention of Human Rights regulate the right to family and private life and, respectively, the right to marriage. These rights have been transposed into the national legislation of the States-members of European Union. The two rights that we are speaking of, which can be found as a constitutional principle and as an ordinary law, tries to reduce the public authorities interference into the private and personal family field. The reality proves that the right to marriage has been broken by the impossibility of the spouses to marry because they can not be divorced. This is the reason why we have two different rights in European Convention: the right to private, family life and the right to marriage. Many European states still have a limited regulation of the reasons for getting the dissolution of marriage. The European Convention has nothing to do with such cases because does not regulates the right to divorce and it would be an interference into the national law. How can a person be married again if he/she doesn’t have the possibility to divorce? In these conditions, can we take the European Convention into consideration as a real instrument of protection for the right to marriage? The first precedent of ECHR jurisprudences limits the infringement of the right to marriage made by the national Courts because of the lack of regulations or a bad interpretation of it.

scholarly journals The environmental right in the system of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms – selected aspects

2020 ◽  
Vol 31 (4) ◽  
pp. 1-7
Author(s):  
Anna Dąbrowska
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Family Life ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Council Of Europe ◽  
Environmental Rights ◽  
European Court ◽  
Fundamental Freedoms ◽  
Protection Of Human Rights ◽  
A Charge ◽  
The Right

Abstract This paper aims to discuss the place of environmental right in the system of the 1950 European Convention – a fundamental Council of Europe treaty on protection of human rights. Interestingly, it does not explicitly guarantee the environmental right, it needs to be determined; therefore, if individuals can cite violations of this right in their complaints to the European Court of Human Rights – the authority guarding obedience to the European Convention. Analysis of the Strasbourg decisions implies the environmental right can be applied to highly diverse situations. In practice, complainants cite its infringements in connection with violations of the right to private and family life as incorporated in Article 8 of the European Convention. This does not mean, however, every time a complainant cites Article 8 of the European Convention to accuse a state of breaching their environmental rights, the European Court is going to accept such a charge.

scholarly journals The environmental right in the system of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms – selected aspects

2020 ◽  
Vol 31 (4) ◽  
pp. 1-7
Author(s):  
Anna Dąbrowska
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Family Life ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Council Of Europe ◽  
Environmental Rights ◽  
European Court ◽  
Fundamental Freedoms ◽  
Protection Of Human Rights ◽  
A Charge ◽  
The Right

Abstract This paper aims to discuss the place of environmental right in the system of the 1950 European Convention – a fundamental Council of Europe treaty on protection of human rights. Interestingly, it does not explicitly guarantee the environmental right, it needs to be determined; therefore, if individuals can cite violations of this right in their complaints to the European Court of Human Rights – the authority guarding obedience to the European Convention. Analysis of the Strasbourg decisions implies the environmental right can be applied to highly diverse situations. In practice, complainants cite its infringements in connection with violations of the right to private and family life as incorporated in Article 8 of the European Convention. This does not mean, however, every time a complainant cites Article 8 of the European Convention to accuse a state of breaching their environmental rights, the European Court is going to accept such a charge.

7. Freedom of religion and expression

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bernadette Rainey
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Hate Speech ◽  
Freedom Of Expression ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Freedom Of Religion ◽  
Essential Information ◽  
European Court ◽  
State Restriction ◽  
The Uk ◽  
The Right

Each Concentrate revision guide is packed with essential information, key cases, revision tips, exam Q&As, and more. Concentrates show you what to expect in a law exam, what examiners are looking for, and how to achieve extra marks. This chapter focuses on freedom of religion and freedom of expression, which are classified as qualified rights, and examines Article 9 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), which explains the right to hold or not hold a belief as well as the right to manifest a belief. It also considers how the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) decides if there has been manifestation of belief, interpretation of Article 10 with respect to views that shock and disturb and some forms of hate speech, and state restriction of expression. The chapter concludes with a discussion of freedom of religion and expression in the UK.

Family Matters: European Court of Human Rights Finds German Parenting Rights Decisions to be in Violation of Article 8 of the Convention

2002 ◽  
Vol 3 (4) ◽  
Author(s):  
Cristina Hoss
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Family Life ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Fourth Section ◽  
Natural Family ◽  
Parents And Children ◽  
European Court ◽  
The Right

The fourth section of the, European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) in Strasbourg, in a judgment from 26 February 2002, held that the German authorities, in a case involving the revocation of parenting rights, violated Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights. The circumstances of the case are compelling: the painful separation of parents and children ordered by the German authorities in the interests of the children, followed by several years of hard-fought litigation as the parents struggled to reestablish their parenting rights over their children and to restore their natural family. The Court concluded that the interference in the right of private and family life was not proportionate to the legitimate aim pursued by the German authorities.

scholarly journals The United Kingdom’s Coronavirus Act, deprivations of liberty, and the right to liberty and security of the person

2020 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Jonathan Pugh
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Human Rights ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Human Rights Law ◽  
Legal Certainty ◽  
The Public ◽  
European Court ◽  
The Uk ◽  
The Right ◽  
Article 5

Abstract In response to the SARS-CoV-2 coronavirus pandemic the UK government has passed the Coronavirus Act 2020 (CA). Among other things, this act extends existing statutory powers to impose restrictions of liberty for public health purposes. The extension of such powers naturally raises concerns about whether their use will be compatible with human rights law. In particular, it is unclear whether their use will fall within the public heath exception to the Article 5 right to liberty and security of the person in the European Convention of Human Rights. In this paper, I outline key features of the CA, and briefly consider how the European Court of Human Rights has interpreted the public health exception to Article 5 rights. This analysis suggests two grounds on which restrictions of liberty enforced some under the CA might be vulnerable to claims of Article 5 rights violations. First, the absence of specified time limits on certain restrictions of liberty means that they may fail the requirement of legal certainty championed by the European Court in its interpretation of the public health exception. Second, the Coronavirus Act’s extension of powers to individuals lacking public health expertise may undermine the extent to which the act will ensure that deprivations of liberty are necessary and proportionate.

The European Court of Human Rights has the Turkish Security Forces Held Responsible for Violations of Human Rights: The Case of Akdivar and Others

1997 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
pp. 99-110 ◽  
Author(s):  
Leo Zwaak
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Private Life ◽  
Violent Conflict ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Eastern Region ◽  
Human Right ◽  
Security Forces ◽  
South Eastern ◽  
European Court ◽  
The Right

In this article, special attention will be given to the recent judgment of the European Court of Human Right in the case of Akdivar and Others v. Turkey. Since 1985, a violent conflict has raged in the South-Eastern region of Turkey, between the Turkish security forces and sections of the Kurdish population in favour of Kurdish autonomy, in particular members of the PKK (Workers' Party of Kurdistan). Since 1987, 10 of the 11 provinces of South-Eastern Turkey have been subjected to emergency rule, which was in force at the time of the facts complained of. The main issue in this case concerned the fact that during this conflict, a large number of villages have been destroyed and evacuated by the security forces. According to the applicants, the alleged burning of their houses by the security forces constituted, inter alia, a violation of Article 3 (the prohibition of torture and inhuman treatment or punishment) and Article 8 (the right of respect for private life, family life, and home) of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), and Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 (property rights).

scholarly journals Internet and freedom of expression in the case law of the European Court of Human Rights

2020 ◽  
Vol 54 (3) ◽  
pp. 1023-1042
Author(s):  
Ljiljana Mijović
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Freedom Of Expression ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Private Life ◽  
European Convention ◽  
The Internet ◽  
European Court ◽  
Protection Of Human Rights ◽  
The Right ◽  
And Control

Internet as a means of communication, whatever the type of information it might be used for, falls within the exercise of the right to freedom of expression, as guaranteed by Article 10 of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms. As established in the European Court's case law, freedom of expression constitutes one of the essentials of a democratic society, therefore limitations on that freedom foreseen in Article 10 § 2 of the Convention are to be interpreted strictly. In order to ensure effective protection of one's freedom of expression on the Internet, States bear a positive obligation to create an appropriate regulatory framework, balancing the right to freedom of expression on one and the limitations prescribed in Article 10 § 2, on the other hand. Special attention in doing so is to be paid to the risk of harm posed by content and communications on the Internet to the exercise and enjoyment of other human rights and freedoms guaranteed by the European Convention, particularly the right to respect for private life. While it is the fact that the electronic network, serving billions of users worldwide, will never be subject to the same regulations and control, because of the national authorities' margin of appreciation, the European Court established commonly applicable general principles regarding the Internet as a media of exercising right to freedom of expression.

scholarly journals O “ESVERDEAMENTO” DA CONVENÇÃO EUROPEIA DE DIREITOS HUMANOS: VÍCIOS E VIRTUDES / THE “GREENING” OF THE EUROPEAN CONVENTION ON HUMAN RIGHTS: VICES AND VIRTUES

2017 ◽  
Vol 22 (3) ◽  
pp. 169
Author(s):  
José Adércio Leite Sampaio
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Environmental Protection ◽  
Family Life ◽  
European Convention ◽  
European Court ◽  
The Right

Não há uma previsão expressa do direito ao meio ambiente equilibrado na Convenção Europeia de Direitos Humanos (CEDH). Sem embargo, há diversas normas e políticas destinadas a promover em toda Europa uma proteção ambiental. A Corte Europeia de Direitos Humanos, embora não o reconheça como um direito implícito na CEDH, tem-se valido dos direitos expressamente nela previstos, sobretudo do direito ao respeito à vida privada e familiar, para afirmar-lhe, de modo reflexo, a proteção. É o que tem sido chamado de “ecologização” ou “esverdeamento” da Convenção Europeia. Embora esse entendimento apresente seus problemas, tem sido um instrumento que, progressivamente, amplia a proteção daquele direito, tanto em seu aspecto substantivo, quanto em sua dimensão processual. There is no express right to a balanced environment in the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR). Nevertheless, there are several rules and policies to promote the environmental protection throughout Europe. Although not recognizing it as an implicit right in the ECHR, the European Court of Human Rights has been making use of the rights provided therein, particularly the right to respect for private and family life, to affirm it reflexively. It is what has been called “greening” of the European Convention. This understanding presents its problems, but it has been an instrument that progressively extends the protection of that right, both in its substantive aspect, and in its procedural dimension.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document