text d'anglais privé

What is the main decision-making body of the Council of Europe ?. The Secretary General of the Council of Europe, elected by the Parliamentary Assembly. The Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe, comprised of delegations of national parliaments of the Member States. The European Court of Human Rights, comprised of judges appointed by each Member State. The Committee of Ministers, comprised of the Ministers of Foreign Affairs of the Member States or their permanent representatives.

The European Convention on Human Rights is predominantly concerned with which of the following ?. Economic freedom. Environmental rights. Economic and social rights. Civil and political rights.

Who is primarily in charge of enforcing the European Convention on Human Rights ?. The European Court of Human Rights. The national Supreme Courts. Domestic Courts. The European Court of Justice.

The European Convention on Human Rights can be enforced in a domestic court or before the European Court of Human Rights by…?. Legal persons only. States only. Natural persons only. Any natural or legal person provided that a breach has occurred of any of the rights contained in the Convention or the accompanying protocols e. Any natural or legal person provided that a breach has occurred of any of the rights contained in the Convention or the accompanying protocols and that the right in question is also expressly protected under domestic legislation.

John claims that his rights under Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) have been infringed by a public authority. Although he wishes to protest, he is unwilling to bring court proceedings against the public authority because of the publicity he might receive, and because of the cost. Mike, John's wealthy brother, is not affected by the alleged infringement but says she would agree to start legal proceedings on John’s behalf. Can Mike bring legal proceedings as John’s representative under the European Convention on Human Rights ?. Yes, because family representatives are specifically granted standing under the European Convention on Human Rights. Yes, because the court will be satisfied that the cousin, as a representative, is able to meet the expenses of the proceedings. No, because a representative can only bring an action under the European Convention on Human Rights where it replaces numerous individuals making identical claims. No, because only a victim of the infringement can bring an action and he is not a victim. Yes, because the European Convention on Human Rights provides that proceedings may be brought by a representative where anonymity is a serious concern for the victim.

A non-French national living in France has allegedly committed a serious crime in his country of origin. His country of origin is not a signatory to the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR). The French government has issued an order for the deportation of the man to his country of origin. However, the man asserts that the evidence used against him in respect of the alleged crime was obtained by the use of torture. Under the ECHR, the man challenges the deportation order and the Court in charge of deciding the case eventually accepts the man’s assertion. On this basis, would the Court uphold the deportation order or not ?. Yes. It would uphold the order because the man has allegedly committed a serious crime and the European Convention on Human Rights is not intended to protect criminals. Yes. It would uphold the order because the French government is not responsible for how another sovereign state obtains evidence for use in criminal trials. Yes. It would uphold the order because the merits of deportation decisions involving the human rights of nationals from non-signatory countries must be considered by the European Court of Human Rights only, to the exclusion of domestic Courts. No. It would not uphold the order because the Convention provides that member countries must secure the Convention rights for everyone within their jurisdiction. No. It would not uphold the order because considering the international nature of the case, the latter would have to be reviewed by the relevant French Supreme Court.

Is it possible to lodge an anonymous application before the European Court of Human Rights ?. Yes, if the application is lodged by a minor’s legal representative on behalf of the minor. No, the identity of the applicant must always be public to prevent any abuse of the right to apply to the Court. Yes, when it can be demonstrated by the applicant that his/her personal safety could be endangered should the defendant State know who he/she is. No, the identity of the applicant must always be disclosed to the Court but it is possible to ask the latter not to disclose it to the defendant State.

How is an application generally processed by the European Court of Human Rights when it is clearly inadmissible ?. It is processed by a seven-judge chamber when dealing with a violation of an absolute right. It is processed by a three-judge committee, except when dealing with an absolute right. It is processed by the Grand Chamber when dealing with a violation of an absolute right. It is processed by a single judge, except when dealing with an absolute right.

The notion of “specific measures” can refer to : The request made by a Member State to the Court to be allowed temporarily not to apply all or some of the rights set out in the Convention due to specific circumstances. A change in the domestic legislation of a Member State to make it comply with the Convention. The general obligation for a Member State to respect human rights. Any compensation paid by a Member State that was in breach of the Convention to the victim of the breach.

The case Airey v Ireland [1979] involved : A violation of the Right to an Effective Remedy by Ireland, as even though the Irish legislation provided that self-representation of an individual before the High Court (ie. without the assistance of a lawyer) was allowed, the complexity of the procedure before that court made that right ineffective in practice. A violation of the Right to marry by Ireland, as the Irish legislation at the time only allowed Judicial Separation and prohibited divorce, whereas the case law of the European Court of Human Rights provided that the Right to marry also included the right not to remain married against one’s will. A violation of the right to a Fair Trial by Ireland as the unavailability of Legal Aid in Ireland regarding family law and other civil cases was making it impossible for the applicant, a victim of domestic violence, to be assisted by a lawyer before the courts to obtain judicial separation from her husband, as her financial means did not allow her to meet the cost of such legal assistance. A violation of the Prohibition of Discrimination by Ireland, as the Court decided that the denial of access to justice by Ireland due to the lack of financial means amounted to discrimination.

The fact that the rights set out in the Convention are “interdependent and indivisible” means that. Everyone is entitled to these rights in equal measure, without discrimination. The States are under a conventional duty to pass any and all legislation required to protect all the rights set out in the Convention. There must be a violation of at least two rights protected by the Convention for an application to be lodged with the Court. All the rights set out in the Convention are of equal value. All the rights set out in the Convention are intertwined and the fact of not respecting one of them may adversely affect another.

The right to Respect for Private and Family Life protected by article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights is a qualified right, which means : That a public authority must not interfere with this right under any circumstances. That a public authority must interfere with this right if it is in accordance with the law, in the interest of the national security, public safety or prevention of crime or to protect other people’s rights and freedoms. That a public authority may not interfere with this right under any circumstances, except in the interest of the national security, public safety or prevention of crime or to protect other people’s rights and freedoms. That a public authority may interfere with this right if it is in accordance with the law, in the interest of the national security, public safety or prevention of crime or to protect other people’s rights and freedoms. That a public authority cannot interfere with this right under any circumstances, except in times of war.

Regarding the protection of the rights guaranteed by the European Convention on Human Rights, the notion of ‘proportionality’ refers to : The possibility for a State to interfere with one or several absolute rights protected by the Convention provided that the interference is necessary and proportionate to a legitimate aim to be achieved. The possibility for a State to interfere with one or several qualified rights protected by the Convention provided that the interference is necessary and proportionate to a legitimate aim to be achieved. The fact that it is not possible for a State to interfere with one or several absolute rights protected by the Convention since the rights protected by the Convention are inherent to everyone, i.e. they belong to everyone by the mere fact of being a human being. The possibility for a State to interfere with one or several rights protected by the Convention, whether qualified or absolute, provided that the interference is necessary and proportionate to a legitimate aim to be achieved.

The ‘Right to a Fair Trial’ protected by article 6 of the Convention does not include : The right to be assisted by an interpreter during criminal proceedings if necessary. The right not to be detained until proven guilty. The right to a public hearing. The right to be assisted by a lawyer during police questioning in custody.

What does Article 13 of the European Convention on Human Rights protect ?. The Right to Freedom and Security. The Right to an Effective Remedy. The Right to Life d. The Right to Freedom of Expression.

Which of the following is not considered by the European Court of Human Rights as a violation of article 4 of the Convention, dealing the prohibition of slavery and forced labour ?. The fact for an army officer to be required to pay at once a very high amount of money to a State in order to resign before the end of his contract, hence forcing him to keep on serving in the army. The fact for a State not to investigate properly into the allegations of a woman complaining that she had been forced into prostitution over several months. The fact for a doctor to be forced to participate in the emergency service organised by an association of Health Insurance Physicians even though the doctor in question is not a member of that association and did not practice under the public health insurance scheme. The fact for a 16-year-old migrant girl to have her passport confiscated and to be held as an unpaid domestic worker and required to work for fifteen hours a day to reimburse the cost of the airline ticket.

Which of the following statements is not true regarding the case Ireland v UK [1978] ?. The case was the first one between two states to be brought before the European Court of Human Rights. The case dealt with the use of sensory deprivation and disorientation techniques by the British authorities against members of the Irish Republican Army (IRA) in places of detention in Northern Ireland. The European Court of Human Rights decided the case against the UK on the ground of the use of torture by the British authorities. The European Court of Human Rights decided the case against the UK on the ground of the use of inhuman and degrading treatment by the British authorities.

The case Airey v Ireland [1979] involved : A violation of the Right to an Effective Remedy by Ireland, as even though the Irish legislation provided that self-representation of an individual before the High Court (ie. without the assistance of a lawyer) was allowed, the complexity of the procedure before that court made that right ineffective in practice. A violation of the Right to marry by Ireland, as the Irish legislation at the time only allowed Judicial Separation and prohibited divorce, whereas the case law of the European Court of Human Rights provided that the Right to marry also included the right not to remain married against one’s will. A violation of the right to a Fair Trial by Ireland as the unavailability of Legal Aid in Ireland regarding family law and other civil cases was making it impossible for the applicant, a victim of domestic violence, to be assisted by a lawyer before the courts to obtain judicial separation from her husband, as her financial means did not allow her to meet the cost of such legal assistance. A violation of the Prohibition of Discrimination by Ireland, as the Court decided that the denial of access to justice by Ireland due to the lack of financial means amounted to discrimination.

For an application before the European Court of Human Rights to be admissible, it must be lodged : Within 4 months (previously 6 months) from the date on which the final decision was made by a national court, regardless of whether a copy of the decision was served on the applicant, with no time limit extension whatsoever. Within 4 months (previously 6 months) from the date on which the final decision was made by a national court or from the date on which a copy of the decision was served on the applicant or their lawyer, except if the last day falls on a Saturday, a Sunday or an official holiday, in which case the time-limit is extended to the next working day. Within 4 months (previously 6 months) from the date on which the final decision was made by a national court, regardless of whether a copy of the decision was served on the applicant, except if the last day falls on a Saturday, a Sunday or an official holiday, in which case the time- limit is extended to the next working day. Within 4 months (previously 6 months) from the date on which the final decision was made by a national court or from the date on which a copy of the decision was served on the applicant or their lawyer, with no time limit extension whatsoever.

What are the remedies available against a decision by the European Court of Human Rights declaring an application inadmissible ?. None. A decision declaring an application inadmissible is final and cannot be challenged. New application. If an application is declared inadmissible by the Court, it is possible to lodge a new application within a week from the decision declaring the inadmissibility. Appeal. It is possible to appeal a decision declaring an application inadmissible and in that case, the decision declaring the inadmissibility will be reviewed by the Appeal Chamber of the Court. Regularisation. If an application is declared inadmissible by the Court, it is possible to regularise the application within a week from the decision declaring the inadmissibility.

An “interim measure” : Is a measure decided by the European Court of Human Rights which challenges the merits of a decision made by a national authority. Is a measure decided by the European Court of Human Rights to suspend temporarily the enforcement of a decision made by a national authority. Is a decision of the European Court of Human Rights dismissing an application as being inadmissible. Is a decision made by a national court to challenge a decision of the European Court of Human Rights suspending temporarily the enforcement of a decision made by a national authority.