scholarly journals Encuentros y desencuentros entre el TEDH y el TJUE en materia de igualdad de género = Agreements and disagreents between ECHR and CJEU in matters of gender equality

Author(s):  
José Fernando Lousada Arochena

Resumen. El estudio analiza las coincidencias y las discrepancias existentes entre la jurisprudencia del TEDH y del TJUE en relación con dos cuestiones concretas en las cuales está implicada la igualdad de género: la conciliación masculina y la discriminación múltiple. La existencia de las discrepancias obedece a las diferentes características de los ordenamientos jurídicos que cada tribunal debe aplicar. El Convenio Europeo de Derechos Humanos es un texto sobre derechos humanos y habilita ampliamente al TEDH para su aplicación. Mientras que el Derecho de la Unión Europea, aunque tiene unos objetivos de integración más ambiciosos que el CEDH, presenta carencias en materia de derechos humanos, lo que limita en no pocas ocasiones la actuación del TJUE. La solución estaría en la deseable integración de ambos ordenamientos jurídicos a través de la adhesión de la Unión Europea al CEDH.Palabras clave: igualdad de género, TEDH, TJUE.Abstract. The study analyzes the coincidences and discrepancies between the jurisprudence of the ECHR and the CJEU in relation to two specific issues in which gender equality is involved: male conciliation and multiple discrimination. The existence of the discrepancies is due to the different characteristics of the legal systems that each court must apply. The European Convention on Human Rights is a text on human rights and enables the ECHR to apply it broadly. While the European Union Law, although it has more ambitious integration objectives than the ECHR, it has many lacks about human rights, which limits the CJEU’s decissions on many occasions. The solution would be the desirable integration of both legal systems through the accession of the European Union to the ECHR.Keywords: gender equality, ECHR, CJEU.

ICL Journal ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
pp. 11-41
Author(s):  
Maurizio Arcari ◽  
Stefania Ninatti

Abstract Constitutionalization is a peculiar process which characterizes the whole fabric of modern international law. It may however display different levels of evolution and different implications when distinct legal sub-systems are considered: this appears to be especially true at the European level, in particular in the context of the European Union law and of the European Convention on Human Rights. This article aims at unveiling the key elements of the constitutionalization process as developed by the judges sitting in Luxembourg and Strasbourg. In their relevant case law, both the EU Court of Justice (ECJ) and the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) have identified the core concepts and elements lying behind the constitutionalization of their respective legal systems. The analysis of the ECJ and ECtHR case law will be divided into two different parts dealing with the internal dimension from one side, and external one from the other side. While presenting nuances and implications that are linked to the diverse degree of integration of the two legal systems, it may be submitted that the core elements of constitutionalization depicted by the Luxembourg and Strasbourg judges reveal some common patterns.


Author(s):  
Pablo Cruz Mantilla de los Ríos

La identidad nacional es una categoría jurídica central del Derecho de la Unión Europea que está siendo invocada cada vez con mayor frecuencia entre la doctrina, así como entre los Tribunales Constitucionales nacionales y el Tribunal de Justicia de la Unión Europea. En estas circunstancias, está surgiendo una, aún incipiente e inmadura, literatura académica que, con base en una serie de recientes pronunciamientos del Tribunal Europeo de Derechos Humanos, está interpretando si existe en el marco del sistema del Convenio Europeo de Derechos Humanos una figura análoga. Este artículo tiene por objeto analizar en, clave comparada, la posible emergencia de dicha categoría en ese nuevo contexto jurídico. National identity is an essential legal category in European Union law which has increasingly been invoked by scholars as well as constitutional courts and the Court of Justice of the European Union. In this connection, it is emerging a, still incipient and immature, legal literature which, on the basis of a series of recent judgments coming from the European Court of Human Rights, is interpreting whether there is an analogous figure in the framework of the European Convention of Human Rights system. This article aims to analyse, in a comparative key, the possible advent of the above-mentioned figure in this new legal context.


2020 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. 5-23
Author(s):  
Marija Daka

The paper presents some of the most relevant aspects of European nondiscrimination law established th rough European Union law and the European Convention on Human Rights, looking also at the evolution of the norms and milestones of case-law on equal treatment within the two systems. The paper gives an overview of the non-discrimination concept as interpreted by the Court of Justice of the European Union and by the European Court of Human Rights. We examine the similar elements but also give insight into conceptual differences between the two human rights regimes when dealing with equal treatment. The differences mainly stem from the more complex approach taken by EU law although, based on analysed norms, cases, and provisions, the aspects of equal treatment in EU law are largely consistent with the practice of the ECtHR. Lastly, the paper briefl y places the European non-discrimination law within the multi-layered human rights system, giving some food for thought for the future potential this concept brings.


Teisė ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 110 ◽  
pp. 24-45
Author(s):  
Ingrida Danėlienė

[full article, abstract in English; abstract in Lithuanian] The article investigates the right to respect for family life, established by Article 7 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, as applied and interpreted in conjunction with the right to marry and the right to found a family, laid down in Article 9 of the Charter. The standard of protection set by European Union law regarding these rights is identified by taking into account the standard of protection of the relevant rights established by the European Convention on Human Rights and the established case law of the European Court of Human Rights. Topical issues relating to the consolidation of these individual rights at the national level in the Republic of Lithuania are also addressed in the article. In doing so, an emphasis is laid on the content of the concepts of “family” and “family life” under supranational and national law.


ICL Journal ◽  
2013 ◽  
Vol 7 (3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Rosmarie Doblhoff-Dier ◽  
Sandra Kusmierczyk

AbstractBy acceding to the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), the EU’s role as supranational player in the complex human rights architecture of Europe will be finally recognized. On 5 April 2013, the negotiators of the accession procedure of the European Union to the ECHR agreed on a package of draft accession instruments. Constituting a mile­stone on the road to accession, the now revised Accession Agreement still leaves vast room for discussion. By critically scrutinizing some of its modalities, this article will evaluate its impact on the human rights jurisdiction of the European Court of Justice (ECJ) and the Eu­ropean Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) and the relationship between both courts. To this end, it will address the somewhat disproportionate involvement of the European Union in the future jurisdiction of the ECtHR and in the decision making of the Council of Europe in matters linked to the ECHR. Furthermore, it will focus on the compatibility of the Draft Agree­ment with the principle of autonomous interpretation of European Union Law: a highly rel­evant discussion for the ECJ’s future Opinion under Article 218 (11) TFEU on the compatibil­ity of the finalized draft agreement with the Treaties - the next hurdle for accession.


2017 ◽  
Vol 42 (4) ◽  
pp. 325-363
Author(s):  
Aistė Mickonytė

This article examines national regulations relating to the recognition of names in official documents by focusing on Article 21 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union and Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights, having particular regard to the judgment of the European Court of Justice in the case of Runevič-Vardyn and Wardyn. It also assesses the potential impact that this and other cases before the ecj and the European Court of Human Rights may exert on national minorities. The recognition of names is not regulated in European Union law; thus, the eu member states may freely determine the usage of names in official documents, as the state language represents a constitutional value and part of the national identity of many eu member states. Therefore, only regulation of names that causes excessive interference with the exercise of freedom of movement or respect for private and family life is unlawful under eu law. This issue will also be discussed in light of Article 4(2) of the Treaty on the European Union, by which the ecj assesses these types of interference with the eu’s duty to respect the national identities of its member states.


2020 ◽  
Vol 36 (3-4) ◽  
pp. 289-308
Author(s):  
Marija Daka

The apropos of this article is Additional Protocol No. 16 complementing to the European Convention on Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms that recently came into force. This paper presents the main common and differing elements of two non-contentious procedures before supranational courts. The advisory opinion procedure of European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) and the preliminary ruling procedure marked by unprecedented success before the Court of Justice of the European Union, -as at least prima facie- similar types of proceedings. The paper also analyses cross-cutting issues arising from the application of both procedures in the same case arising before designated national court or tribunal. Although the purpose of the advisory opinion is to achieve and maintain efficiency bearing in mind that the ECtHR is victim of its own success the paper outlines some of serious doubts and assumptions whether in current format and in foreseeable future this purpose will be achieved. Furthermore, the paper also takes a closer look at the procedural aspects of the first advisory opinion delivered by ECtHR given its importance as we can draw at least some conclusions on the functioning of this type of procedure. Lastly, the paper -in comparative spirit- also refers to the relationship of the ECHR and the European Union Law as the two main trustees within the European multilevel system of rights protection.


Author(s):  
Iris Saraiva Russowsky

Resumo: O presente trabalho busca analisar a relação entre direito comunitário e o direito internacional a partir da integração regional ocorrida na União Europeia. Busca-se analisar a viabilidade da adesão da União Europeia à Convenção Europeia de Direitos Humanos (CEDH), levando-se em conta, principalmente, a atuação do Tribunal de Justiça da União Europeia (TJUE) e a reformulação ocorrida no bloco com o Tratado de Lisboa (2009). Palavras-chave: Direito Comunitário; Direito Internacional; União Europeia; Adesão à CEDH. Abstract: This study aims to analyze the relationship between European Union law and international law from the regional integration occurred in Europe. It analyzes the viability of the European Union's adherence to the European Convention of Human Rights (ECHR), taking into account mainly the work of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) and the reformulation occurred in the block before the Lisbon Treaty (2009).  Keywords: European Union Law; International Law; European Union; Adherence to European Convention of Human Rights.


2021 ◽  
pp. 203228442199593
Author(s):  
Wolfgang Schomburg ◽  
Anna Oehmichen ◽  
Katrin Kayß

As human rights have increasingly gained importance at the European Union level, this article examines the remaining scope of human rights protection under the EU–UK Trade and Cooperation Agreement. While some international human rights instruments remain applicable, the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union did not become part of the Trade and Cooperation Agreement (TCA). The consequences, especially the inapplicability of the internationalised ne bis in idem principle, are analysed. Furthermore, the conditionality of the TCA in general as well as the specific conditionality for judicial cooperation in criminal matters are discussed. In this context, the risk that cooperation may cease at any moment if any Member State or the UK leave the European Convention of Human Rights is highlighted. Lastly, the authors raise the problem of the lack of judicial review, as the Court of Justice of the European Union is no longer competent.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document