Please enable JavaScript.

Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.

Human Rights (ECHR (Private life and Family Article 8 (Restrictions…

- - - - Prescribed by Law
      - Necessary in a Democratic Society
      - Legitimate aim
  - - - Prescribed by Law
      - Necessary in a Democratic Society
      - Legitimate aim
- - - - The 'but for' test (Section 8 HRA -> Article 41)
        What would happen but for the violation?
    - - Minum thresshold to obtain damages for distress and anxiety
        
        1) Intensity
        
        2) Exceptional circumstances
        
        3) Exceptional gravity
- - - - (1) a right mentioned in the Convention or its Protocols (basis)
      - (2) breach must have been commited by a public authority (defendant)
      - (3) applicant must have directly suffered the violation of which they complain
        or: official representative of an alleged victim who has died or dissapeared (claimant)
      - (4) Applicant must have exhausted all domestic remedies before applying to the ECtHR (domestic remedies)
      - (5) submitted no later than 6 months after the final decision by the highest competent national authority
    - - Inter-state complaints
      - applications from individual
    - - tests for admissibility
        
        Domestic forums must be exhausted before a complaint is lodged at the ECtHR
      - 1 Judge to decide whether accept or not
        
        Committee of 3 Judges
        (to decide in case of no handling)
        
        a Chamber consist of 7 Judges
        (to decide accept or not)
    - - a complaint is declared admissible
      - If the friendly settlement is not reached, the ECtHR will consider the complaint "on the merits"
    - - The verdict is passed by majority
      - The verdict is published with reasons
    - - must be requested in 3 months of the Chamber's judgment
      - shall be resolved by the Grand Chamber (to review Chamber's judgment)
    - - [Where] The contracting State has not violated
      - the contracting State may still be open to a claim, if they did not take steps to prevent violations
      - Under Article 2 ECHR, the contracting State has a positive obligation to "protect "at risk prisoner" from violations by the State or by other prisoners*
      - Under Article 8 ECHR, the contracting
        State has apositive obligation to protect the privacy of persons
  - - - Contracting State may restrict Convention rights
      - by reasons of political, social and cultural traditions (local mores)
      - depends on particular facts and circumstances of each case
      - Considerations
        
        Nature of the Convention rights
        
        Its importance to the applicant
        
        the nature of the relevant actions
      - allow domestic governments some room for manoeuvre in satisfying their Convention obligations
    - - Give the contracting State autonomy of choice vis-à-vis the method
      - supervised by Commitee of Minister
    - - to introduce a legislation measures at EU level
      - requires exhaustive enquiry into the enabling legislation or executive decision, and the act or omission itself
    - - Article 41 ECHR
      - set out the execution conditions in its judgments (deadline, recipient, defaut interest etc.)
    - - The ECHR must be interpreted as a living document
      - in accordance with Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties 1969
  - - - Bureau of the Assembly
        
        Council of Europe's Parliarmentary Assembly
- - - - complaints must be brought within one year
      - The hearing court depend on the subject matter of the complaint and the desired remedy
  - - - Inserting words into a statute that are not contained within it
    - - Omitting words from a statute
    - - Choosing the particular meaning of a statute
- - - - Illegality
      - Irrationality
        
        (1) whether the government body acted while pursuing a legitimate objective
        
        (2) whether that objective necessarily demanded that the government body interfered with an entitlement possessed by an individual or company
        
        (3) whether the government body interfered as little as possible
      - Procedural Impropriety