Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gxg78 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T09:31:12.872Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Evans v. UK – European Court of Human Rights

The Tragedy of Ms Evans: Conflicts and Incommensurability of Rights, Evans v. the United Kingdom, Fourth Section Judgment of 7 March 2006, Application No. 6339/05

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  14 December 2006

Jacco Bomhoff  and
Lorenzo Zucca
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Proportionality review and, in particular, ad hoc judicial balancing of competing rights and interests are probably the most celebrated tools propagated by the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) and are currently dominant features of the European discourse on rights. This methodology and its discourse, in fact, have gained such widespread popularity that, although the outcome of Convention-based and other fundamental rights claims is often far from certain, the way they will be treated by judges can be predicted with some confidence.

Keywords

EvansEuropean Court of Human RightsConflict of RightsIncommensurabilityEuropean Discourse on RightsIn Vitro FertilisationFundamental RightsDilemmasRights of PrivacyBright-line RulesFair BalancePretty
Type
Case Notes
Information
European Constitutional Law Review , Volume 2 , Issue 3 , October 2006 , pp. 424 - 442
Copyright
Asser Press 2006

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)