LAW3214 · Week 2

Root
Topic
Theme
Sub-theme
Detail
Case
European System of Human Rights Protection
Interpretive Doctrines
Non-Doctrinal Approach
No general theory of interpretation
VgT Verein gegen Tierfabriken v Switzerland
Autonomous Concepts
Court defines Convention terms independently
Prevents patchwork of definitions
*Case: M v Germany* (Art 7 'penalty')
Effective Protection
Rights practical and effective
Not theoretical and illusory
Artico v Italy
Living Instrument Doctrine
Interpreted in present-day conditions
Evolutive, not originalist
*Case: Tyrer v UK* (birching)
Allows standards to evolve over time
Positive Obligations
Framework Duty
Adequate laws protecting individuals
Must also enforce those laws
X and Y v the Netherlands
Operational Duty (Osman Duty)
Preventive measures where risk known
Real and immediate risk to life
*Case: Osman v UK* [115]–[116]
Subsidiarity
Complementary Subsidiarity
State and Court as partners
Different from EU competitive model
Belgian Linguistic Case
Procedural Subsidiarity
Exhaust domestic remedies (Art 35)
Four-month time limit
Continuing situations excepted
Substantive Subsidiarity
Fourth instance doctrine
Court not an appeals court
Deference to national judges
Kemmache v France (no. 3)
Limits: *Case: Pal v UK*
Margin of Appreciation
Origin and Development
*Case: Greece v UK* (decolonisation)
*Case: Handyside v UK* (leading authority)
Judicial deference and restraint
European Consensus
Margin narrows as consensus develops
*Case: Goodwin v UK* (trans rights)
*Case: Evans v United Kingdom* (IVF)
*Case: Nicklinson v UK* (assisted dying)
Institutional Structure
The Commission (Pre-1998)
Gatekeeping and filtering role
Fact-finding on the ground
Friendly settlements as mediator
Abolished by Protocol 11
Decisions still relevant (s.2 HRA)
*Case: Glimmerveen v Netherlands* (Art 17)
*Case: Sutherland v UK* (friendly settlement)
The Court
First sat 1959, Strasbourg
Originally part-time, now permanent
Art 19: ensure state compliance
Judicial Formations
Single Judge (Art 27)
Inadmissibility decisions only
Committee of 3 (Art 28)
Admissibility and repetitive cases
Chamber of 7 (Art 29)
Admissibility and merits
Workhorse of the Court
Grand Chamber of 17
Authoritative leading judgments
Only ~5% of referral requests succeed
Grand Chamber and Finality
Relinquishment (Art 30)
Serious question or inconsistency
Parties' veto abolished (Protocol 15)
Referral (Art 43)
Within 3 months of chamber judgment
Exceptional cases only
Panel of 5 GC judges decides
Finality (Art 44)
GC judgments always final
Chamber: final after 3 months
Interim Measures (Rule 39)
Nature and Binding Force
Strasbourg interim injunction
Originally non-binding (*Cruz Varas*)
Now binding: *Case: Mamatkulov v Turkey*
2024 Amendment
Exceptional circumstances only
Imminent risk of irreparable harm
Codified existing practice
Application and Jurisdiction
Standing (Art 34)
Who Can Apply
Natural and legal persons
Must be alive: *Case: Vo v France*
Akpınar and Altun v Turkey
Types of Victim
Direct victim
Indirect victim: *Case: McCann v UK*
Potential victim: *Case: Dudgeon v UK*
NGOs via members: *Case: Liberty v UK*
HRA Link
Victim test under s.7 HRA
Not sufficient interest
State Responsibility
State must be responsible
*Case: Behrami v France* (UN acts)
*Case: Nada v Switzerland* (own implementation)
Vertical and horizontal application
Positive obligations create indirect horizontality
*Case: López Ostra v Spain* (pollution)
*Case: A v UK* (reasonable chastisement)
Territorial Jurisdiction
Territorial (Art 1)
Primarily territorial notion
Ilaşcu v Moldova
Extra-Territorial
Effective control: *Case: Cyprus v Turkey*
State agent: *Case: Al-Skeini v UK*
Authority in another CS: *Case: Loizidou v Turkey*
Temporal Effect
Generally prospective only
Art 2 procedural exception
Šilih v Slovenia
Mladenović v Serbia
UK approach: *Case: In re Finucane*; *Case: Re Dalton*
Admissibility (Art 35)
Exhaustion of Domestic Remedies
Available, sufficient, relate to violation
Four-Month Time Limit
Runs from exhaustion of remedies
Continuing situations excepted
Judgment and Execution
Nature of Judgments
Written, declaratory relief
Increasingly specific remedial measures
Just Satisfaction (Art 41)
Damages and costs
Not generous compared to tort
Linked to s.8 HRA domestically
Execution (Art 46)
Supervised by Committee of Ministers
States have discretion on compliance
Convention as Constitutional Instrument
Evolution of Role
Safeguard against totalitarianism
Now Europe's Bill of Rights
"Constitutional instrument of European public order"
Bosphorus v Ireland
Ždanoka v Latvia