The Application of the European Convention on Human Rights and Judicial Dialogue
Keywords:
Judicial dialogue between ECHR and domestic courts. The fourth instance doctrine, the absence of Doctrine of precedent, the Convention as a “Living Instrument”, the comparative interpretation. Autonomous concepts.Abstract
The article is dedicated to the issues of judicial dialogue between the European Court of Human Rights and domestic courts and of its peculiarities.
References
European Court of Human Rights, Council of Europe, Strasbourg, 03/09/1953.
Recommendation of the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe of December 18, 2002 Rec., 2002, 13, [17.12.2019].
Grabenwarter Ch., Pabel K., Europäische Menschenrechtskonvention, 6. Aufl., München, 2016, § 3 Rn. 2, 2-5.
Harris D., O'Boyle M., Warbrick C., Law of the European Convention on Human Rights, 3rd ed., GB, 2016, 11, 36.
Jacobs F. G., White R., Ovey C., The European Convention on Human Rights, 6th ed., Oxford, 2014, 78.
Leach Ph., Taking a Case to the European Court of Human Rights, 4th ed., Oxford, 2017, 190, 191.
Advisory Opinion P16-2018-001, ECHR 132 (2019), delivered on April 10, 2019, §§ 22-24.
Bochan v. Ukraine [05.02.2015], ECHR, №. 2, no. 22251/08, § 61.
Cossey v. UK [1990] A 184, 13 EHRR 622, § 35, PC.
Ferrazzini v. Italy [GC], no. 44759/98, §§ 24-31, ECHR 2001-VII.
Garcia Ruiz v. Spain [1999-I], 31 EHRR 589, §28.
Goodwin Christine v. UK [2002-VI], 35 EHRR 447, § 74, GC.
Ireland v. The United Kingdom [1978] ECHR (Ser. A.), № 25, 154.
Micallef v. Malta [15.10.2009], ECHR, no. 17056/06, § 84.
Khamidov v. Russia [15.11.2007], ECHR, no. 72118/01, § 174.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
