Abstract
The responsibility for adequate protection of individual rights in Europe no longer lies within the exclusive power of national courts subject to the supervision of the supranational institution, European Court of Human Rights. In order to move in the same direction some degree of coherence and cooperation among the national and supranational courts suppose to take place.European Convention on Human Rights leaves it to the Member States to determine the domestic effects of the Strasbourg Court’s judgements. Although, its decisions are essentially declaratory in nature, The European Court of Human Rights under Art.46 of the ECHR, recommend to, or even orders the States specific measures to be adopted. This is a situation which creates possible inconsistency of domestic and international legal obligations. Legal-cultural realities prevent the case law of the Strasbourg Court from having a deeper influence on national judges' decisions. One way to react and make the ECtHR's judgements more effective in national courts is further dialogue.How do national judges respond to the supranational court? But for Strasbourg judgments, would domestic judges exercise their powers in respect of human rights differently? What domestic factors shape significance of ECtHR’s dictum in decision making process of national judges in the United Kingdom, the Republic of Poland and the Federal Republic of Germany? All of these qestions have been aswered with reference to father-child relationship.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.