1 Introduction In an, at least so far, largely unnoted judgment of 12 October 2017, in the case of Burmych and Others v. Ukraine , 1 the Grand Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights (‘ECtHR’) rejected more than 12,000 applications originating from Ukrainian applicants. It did so
Geir Ulfstein and Andreas Zimmermann
Dominik Haider examines to which extent the Pilot-Judgment Procedure is reconcilable with the European Convention on Human Rights. After an analysis of the member states’ obligations to resolve structural deficiencies, the author asks if the European Court of Human Rights is empowered to take the procedural steps which are characteristic of the Pilot-Judgment Procedure. In particular, the Court's express orders are critically scrutinised.
Journal of International Peacekeeping 13 (2009) 159–180 © Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, 2009 DOI 10.1163/187541109X403025 www.brill.nl/joup J O U P A Credibility Gap: Th e Behrami and Saramati Decision of the European Court of Human Rights Heike Krieger * Free University of Berlin, Faculty of
The Law and Practice of International Courts and Tribunals 5 : 183–192, 2006 © 2006 Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, The Netherlands . MODIFICATIONS PROVIDED BY PROTOCOL NO. 14 CONCERNING PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS V INCENZO S TARACE I. I NTRODUCTION The restructuring
purpose, as the Court points out, it is guided by the relevant principles determined by the ICJ in the North Sea Continental Shelf cases. This is however a delicate exercise. On the one hand, strictly speaking, the European Court of Human Rights does not have a jurisdiction to establish the existence of
The Concept of the Rule of Law and the European Court of Human Rights (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2013), pp. i–xxi + 235, isbn : 9780199671199. A few years ago, our constitutional law professor confided to the first-year students, which we were at the time, that using the words “Dicey
Incidental Review of United Nations Security Council Resolutions by the European Court of Human Rights
’) and Switzerland’s implementing regimes were impugned in the Nada 6 and al-Dulimi 7 cases before the European Court of Human Rights (‘ECtHR’ or ‘Strasbourg Court’). Against this background, this article seeks to contribute to the wealth of literature analysing the procedural problems arising from
Jurisdictional Consequences and Resonance in Dutch Society
Friederycke Haijer and Cedric Ryngaert
Organization for Scientific Research under the vidi Scheme. 1 Introduction On 20 November 2014, the Grand Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) in Jaloud v. the Netherlands 1 held that the Netherlands had failed to adequately investigate the circumstances surrounding the death of an
Edited by Christian D. de Fouloy
Part One of The European Strasbourg Register contains in-depth articles by a number of leading personalities; Part Two provides a comprehensive, practical and highly detailed review of Strasbourg-based organizations with a European dimension, including intergovernmental organizations, such as the European Parliament, as well as non-governmental organizations, education and training institutions, trans-border cooperation associations, permanent foreign representatives and accredited press agencies. Thus this volume constitutes a unique and indispensable tool for diplomats, journalists, lawyers, national and international civil servants, businessmen, lobbyists, researchers and all those interested in European institutions and public affairs.