scholarly journals Legal regime of unimplanted embryos in vitro from the positions of doctrine, civil law and judicial practice

2020 ◽  
pp. 238-242
Author(s):  
Nataliia Kvit
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Property Rights ◽  
Assisted Reproductive Technologies ◽  
Civil Law ◽  
Reproductive Technologies ◽  
Legal Regime ◽  
European Court ◽  
The Future ◽  
The Right

The article deals with the problem of determining the legal regime of unimplanted embryo in vitro, which due to the significantdevelopment of the field of assisted reproductive technologies, is increasingly at risk of its illegal use, or even illegal creation for commercialor other non-infertility treatment. The author analyzes different doctrinal approaches in the civil law of Ukraine and Germany,through the prism of the current legal regulation and practice of the European Court of Human Rights. The paper supports the positionon the right to the embryo as a personal immaterial right and expands it in the sense that such a component of reproductive rights asthe right to determine the future fate of embryos in vitro will also belong to persons to whom assisted reproductive technologies havebeen applied and as a result these embryos where created. Resulting from this analysis, the position on the inadmissibility of the interpretationof the unimplanted embryo as an object of property law is expressed. To support this point of view, the author cites the judgmentof the European Court of Human Rights in Parrillo v. Italy, in which the court emphasized the inadmissibility of the assessmentof embryos as an object of property rights. In particular, the paper proposes to define the regime of unimplanted embryo in vitro as anobject that has a personal immaterial connection to persons for whose treatment of infertility (parents-customers) it was created. Andit is these individuals who will have the right to determine its future. In this regard, it is proposed to reflect this concept in the cuurentregulation in partricular Procedure for the use of assisted reproductive technologies. From the proposed wording, first, it will followthat in vitro embryos created as a result of the partial or full use of donor biological material at the request of persons to whom assistedreproductive technologies are applied will have this personal connection only with the future parents and there will not be an ethicaldilemma regarding who will have the right to determine their future fate (biological parents (reproductive cell donors) or future parents).Secondly, it will also mean that embryos can only be created for reproductive purposes, and an institution providing reproductive ser -vices will not have the right to create or dispose of embryos in vitro at its own discretion without the proper consent of its future parent.And, thirdly, it will exclude the possibility of interpreting such embryos as objects of property rights.

scholarly journals Reproductive human rights: General legal support and implementation in the field of criminal justice

2020 ◽  
Vol 85 ◽  
pp. 01002
Author(s):  
Ivan Titko ◽  
Inna Polkhovska
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Assisted Reproductive Technologies ◽  
Reproductive Rights ◽  
Relevant Information ◽  
Reproductive Technologies ◽  
European Court ◽  
Human Ability ◽  
Practical Factors ◽  
The Right ◽  
To Receive

The unsatisfactory demographic situation in European countries, in particular the reduction of fertility, actualizes the issue of reproductive rights. Reproductive rights include the human ability to make free and independent decisions about their reproductive health, including the birth of children, the time and intervals between their birth, the right to decide on procreation without discrimination, threats and violence, as well as recognition of the right to receive relevant information. The article is devoted to the analysis of some problematic general theoretic, criminal law and criminal procedure aspects in the field of reproductive rights. In particular, issues of assisted reproductive technologies application, their regulation at the international and national levels, as well as in the practice of the European Court of Human Rights (hereinafter – ECHR) are considered in the article. Special attention is paid to the specificity of the legal and practical factors of surrogacy.

scholarly journals The right to peaceful enjoyment of property and the security measure of the forfeiture of cash in the jurisprudence of the Serbian Constitutional Court: Certain uncertainty

Pravni zapisi ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 11 (2) ◽  
pp. 620-644
Author(s):  
Tamás Korhecz
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Property Rights ◽  
Public Interest ◽  
Cash Transfer ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
The Public ◽  
Cross Border ◽  
Security Measure ◽  
European Court ◽  
The Right

The right to peaceful enjoyment of property is a first-generation human right, protected by the international and domestic law of the highest rank. This is not an absolute right - the European standards of protecting property rights allow possible interferences prescribed by law. The interferences can be made in the public interest but only under the assumption that the proportionality between the public interest and property rights of individuals at stake is established. Forfeiture of undeclared cash the individuals are transferring across state borders, together with imposing fines for a misdemeanor, represent an interference with individuals' property rights. The EU Member States do not share an identical system of sanctions for this petty offense, but there is a tendency of unification related to the monitoring, registering, and sanctioning of undeclared, cross-border, individual cash transfer. The case-law of the European Court of Human Rights has established rather precise criteria for distinguishing permitted from unpermitted interferences in cases of undeclared cross-border cash transfers. The Serbian Constitutional Court has been faced with several constitutional complaints regarding alleged unconstitutionally of the imposed security measure amounting to the forfeiture of undeclared cash physically transferred across the state borders. The Constitutional Court has ruled inconsistently on the matter. Although it has regularly referred to the European Court of Human Rights' relevant decisions, it fails to be consistent in following the Strasbourg Court's rulings. In this article, the author has suggested that the legal certainty principle requires the Constitutional Court to consistently interpret the constitutional rights and be systematic in following Strasbourg. Only in this way, the Constitutional Court can help regular courts effectively to harmonize the interpretation and application of laws with the constitutional and international human rights standards regarding property rights.

scholarly journals Right To Property: From Magna Carta To The European Convention On Human Rights

SEEU Review ◽  
2015 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
pp. 145-158 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jelena Ristik
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Intellectual Property ◽  
Property Rights ◽  
Intellectual Property Rights ◽  
Trade Mark ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Human Rights Protection ◽  
European Court ◽  
Magna Carta ◽  
The Right

Abstract Property rights are integral part of the freedom and prosperity of every person, although their centrality has often been misprized and their provenance was doubted. Yet, traces of their origin can be found in Magna Carta, signed by the King of England in 1215. It was a turning point in human rights. Namely, it enumerates what later came to be thought of as human rights. Among them was also the right of all free citizens to own and inherit property. The European Convention on Human Rights was heavily influenced by British legal traditions, including Magna Carta. Among other rights, it also guaranties the right to property as a human right. Moreover, the protection of property rights has been extended to intellectual property rights as well. Namely, the European Court of Human Rights has provided protection of intellectual property rights through the adoption of decisions that interpret the right to property, in relation to intellectual property protection claims. It has extended the human rights protection of property to the mere application for registration of the trade mark. This paper has placed its focus on the development and treatment of the right to property starting from Magna Carta to the European Convention on Human Rights, as modern version of Magna Carta. In this sense, the jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights and its role and approach in the protection of the right to property will be examined as well.

An Enterprise as an Object of Civil Rights in Subsoil Use: Challenges and Perspectives

2018 ◽  
pp. 108-116
Author(s):  
V. V. Levochko
Keyword(s):  
Civil Rights ◽  
Property Rights ◽  
Civil Law ◽  
Legal Regime ◽  
Legal Form ◽  
Distinctive Features ◽  
Logical Approach ◽  
The Right ◽  
Legal Consequences

An enterprise as a holder of civil rights is a universal legal construction. When the I Part of the RF Civil Code was adopted, it was assumed that the enterprise would be the main participant of civil law transactions of the business. However, the introduced legal regime of the enterprise did not meet expectations. The study of theoretical standpoints with respect of the legal essence of the enterprise as a holder of civil rights shows the lack of unanimity of opinions among contemporary representatives of civil law. The most justified and logical approach to the development of legislation in this matter involves determination of a generic category "proprietary complex" and introduction of distinctive features in relation to its types, including the enterprise. The subsoil legislation and relevant jurisprudence analysis justifies the prospects for using the enterprise as a party to civil transactions in the subsoil use sphere, since its legal design allows to combine diverse property rights for their effective circulation, which, to a certain extent, will solve the problem of separate legal consequences for the rights to a subsoil plot and property inseparably attached to it, as well as the problem of the legal form of transfer of the right to subsoil use in certain cases.

Property Restitution in Eastern Europe: Domestic and International Human Rights Law Responses

2004 ◽  
Vol 29 (3) ◽  
pp. 325-363 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mariana Karadjova
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Eastern Europe ◽  
Minority Groups ◽  
International Human Rights Law ◽  
Political Rights ◽  
European Court ◽  
The Future ◽  
Civil And Political Rights ◽  
The Right ◽  
Past Injustices

AbstractThis article presents an overview of how those East European countries that are members of the Council of Europe have approached the problems of restitution as a means of reparation for past injustices. In doing so, attention will be paid to: the entitled persons and the extent of restitution; the underlying motivations vis-à-vis the form of reparation (restitution in kind or compensation), and attitudes towards minority groups and foreigners as part of the restitution process. Emphasis will also be given to the role played by international instruments (the ECHR and its future Protocol 12, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, various UN resolutions, etc), as well as by judicial institutions (the European Court of Human Rights, the UN Human Rights Committee) in the evolution of the restitution process in Eastern Europe in general, and regarding such issues as equality between foreigners and nationals as well as minority and religious groups and the elaboration of an international standard of restitution as reparation for abuses of human rights in particular. The bodies of the ECHR have managed to avoid problems related to restitution and reparations for past injustices by arguing that the right of restitution is not guaranteed by art.1 of Protocol 1 to the the ECHR. But the entry into force of a new Protocol 12 to the Convention will likely result in changes being made in this thought process, at least as regards the position of foreigners. If measures denying restitution, owing to the claimant's nationality, were taken after ratifi cation of Protocol 12, the way should be opened in the future to foreigners (in addition to procedures before the UN Human Rights Committee) to more effectively defend their rights relative to such restorative measures: notably, the possibility of seizing the Strasbourg Court with claims relating to justifi cation for "unequal treatment". The right to remedy the injustices committed to the victims of violations of human rights and international humanitarian law has appeared with increasing frequency on the agenda of the UN Commission on Human Rights. Furthermore, in its recent case law, the UN Human Rights Committee has evidenced a concern over several questions relating to the respect of possessions; it has already opted for the proposition that any discrimination on the basis of nationality in restitution legislation can be deemed to be a violation of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. Lastly, after ratifi cation of Protocol 12, we can expect a link to be forged between the vision of the UN Commission on Human Rights and that of the European Court of Human Rights that may—in the future—lead to the elaboration of a common international mechanism regulating restitution as a means for the reparation of abuses of human rights.

scholarly journals Assisted reproductive technologies as a legal category

2021 ◽  
pp. 155-163
Author(s):  
Oksana Pokalchuk
Keyword(s):  
Social Relations ◽  
Assisted Reproductive Technologies ◽  
Civil Law ◽  
Reproductive Technologies ◽  
Legal Aspects ◽  
Moral Rights ◽  
Legal Doctrine ◽  
Legal Concept ◽  
Wide Range ◽  
The Right

Keywords: moral rights, assisted reproductive technologies, legal category The author analyzes the legal concept of «assisted reproductive technologies», which is presentedin the works of Ukrainian and foreign scientists. Given the nature and essence of theuse of assisted reproductive technologies as social relations, the author concludes thatthe main part of the researches belongs to the Civil Law branch of scientific knowledge.It is because the right to assisted reproductive technologies is a part of the system ofmoral rights which are the part of the regulation of Civil Law. At the same time, withinthe legal literature the doctrinal understanding of assisted reproductive technologieshave rather multifaceted, but ambiguous nature of its' scope.Thus, the content of the views of scientists which are analysing in the article, reflectsthe provisions on: a) the functional purpose of assisted reproductive technologies; b) thecontent of their application in the determined cases; c) their instrumental understandingas a set of manipulations (methods, techniques, etc.); d) the exceptional importance of these technologies as the main means of overcoming infertility and solving demographicproblems of today; e) innovative nature of use in the medical field.In addition, at the level of modern legal doctrine, the scientific researches of legal aspectsof assisted reproductive technologies is multi-vector, especially in terms of studyingtheir medical and legal nature, content and consequences, accompanied by increasingrelevance of their knowledge under the influence of rapid medical development, inventionand implementation of new medical technologies, including in the field of human reproduction.Generally modern scientific researches on the legal aspects of assisted reproductivetechnologies is represented by a wide range of scientific works, but most of them aremulti-vector in nature, and scientific conclusions are mostly scattered and not systematized.In fact, the «harmony» of the conceptual and categorical apparatus for assisted reproductivetechnologies is important for the formulation of a scientific problem and thedefinition of methods for its further resolving.

scholarly journals Between Human Rights and Justice Principle in Children’s Civil Rights

MELINTAS ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 32 (2) ◽  
pp. 132
Author(s):  
Wurianalya Maria Novenanty
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Civil Rights ◽  
Civil Law ◽  
Future Generation ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Illegitimate Child ◽  
The Future ◽  
The Status ◽  
Status Difference ◽  
The Right

Children’s rights are fundamental in a country. Children are the future generation of a country. They have rights in civil law field. The examples of such rights are the right to have family name, the right to get alimony, and the right to get inheritance from the parents. Indonesian Law Number 1 of 1974 regarding Marriage (Marriage Law) distinguishes the civil rights of legitimate and illegitimate children. In 2010, the Indonesian Constitutional Court produced a decision which became a controversial decision because it was deemed to ‘legalize’ illegitimate child to have the same rights as legitimate child. The reason behind such decision is the human rights which should apply nondiscriminative principle. Some parties disagree with the reasoning behind this decision. They consider the decision unjust and that it violates social and religious norms in giving illegitimate and legitimate children the same rights in spite of the status difference. The author will discuss children’s civil rights based on civil law, human rights, and justice principle in Indonesia.

Post-Mortal Protection of the Right to Reputation – A Comparative View

2019 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-26 ◽  
Author(s):  
Thierry Vansweevelt ◽  
Lana Bubalo
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Freedom Of Expression ◽  
Common Law ◽  
Civil Law ◽  
Modern Society ◽  
Comprehensive Overview ◽  
Optimal Method ◽  
European Court ◽  
Similarities And Differences ◽  
The Right

AbstractThe paper discusses post-mortal protection of the right to reputation, with the aim of detecting similarities and differences in the legal treatment of this issue in European countries, and understanding the position of the European Court of Human Rights.The current theoretical standpoints as well as legislative approaches are quite diverse. Common law countries do not recognise a cause of action for posthumous defamation at all, and civil law jurisdictions regulate it quite differently.In this paper the authors attempt to provide a comprehensive overview and elaborate in detail the practical and theoretical aspects of the post-mortal protection of the right to reputation in order to answer some of the existing dilemmas. The authors also suggest the optimal method of post-mortal protection of reputational interests in modern society, bearing in mind the difficulty of achieving a balance between the exercise of freedom of expression and the right to reputation.

scholarly journals PROBLEM OF PAYMENT OF COMPENSATION TO BUSINESS OWNERS DURING THE QUARANTINE PERIOD: ANALYSIS OF DOMESTIC AND FOREIGN EXPERIENCE

2021 ◽  
pp. 61-70
Author(s):  
K.H. Nekit ◽  
◽  
◽  
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Property Rights ◽  
Private Property ◽  
Human Life ◽  
State Intervention ◽  
Case Law ◽  
The United States ◽  
Business Owners ◽  
European Court ◽  
The Right

The COVID-19 pandemic has had a significant impact in all areas of human life. Many rights have been restricted to prevent the spread of infection. The restrictions on private property rights during the pandemic were not so obvious, but no less significant. The massive closure of restaurants, cafes, cinemas and other crowded places has resulted in significant losses for business owners. The question arose about the admissibility of such restrictions on the rights of owners, as well as the need to compensate for the losses caused. The purpose of this article is to study the criteria developed by international practice under which the restriction of property rights is allowed, and approaches to resolving issues of compensation for losses caused to owners when it is necessary to ensure a balance of private and public interests in Ukraine. In order to understand whether the owners, whose rights were restricted during the pandemic by depriving them of the opportunity to use their property in business, have the right to compensation, the article analyzes the meaning of "possessions" used in the case law of the European Court of Human Rights. It is concluded that future income within the meaning given by the European Court of Human Rights should also be considered a type of property, so depriving owners of the opportunity to receive income could to some extent be considered as confiscation of property. This approach suggests that during the quarantine the owners were in a sense deprived of property, which raises the question of the need to compensate the owners for the losses incurred during the quarantine measures. The right of owners to compensation is analyzed in the light of the conditions developed in the practice of the European Court of Human Rights for interfering in the peaceful possession of property and the recommendations developed by the United Nations to limit human rights in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic. It is concluded that it is necessary to comply with the principle of legality in case of state intervention in the peaceful possession of property. However, this principle was violated in Ukraine, as the restrictions were introduced not by law, but by the Resolution of the Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine. This gives grounds to challenge the actions of the state and demand payment of compensation for losses incurred by the owners. The article also analyzes approaches to resolving issues of compensation for losses caused to owners as a result of restrictions on their rights, developed in the case law of the United States and Great Britain.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document