No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
Golder Case
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 01 January 2021
Abstract
International law in general — Sources — Codification treaty not yet in force — Value to international tribunal — Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, 1969
Treaties — Interpretation — Principles and rules of interpretation — Codification of rules in Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, 1969 — Whether special approach required for organic treaty — European Convention on Human Rights
Treaties — Interpretation — Bilingual treaties — European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights — Examination and comparison of English and French texts
Treaties — Special kinds of treaties — Treaties establishing special regimes — Whether special rules of interpretation applicable — European Convention on Human Rights
The individual in international law — Human rights and freedoms — European Convention on Human Rights — Prisoner's desire to contact legal adviser with view to taking proceedings against prison official refused by the authorities — Article 6(1) (right to a fair and public hearing in determining civil rights and obligations) — Whether Article 6(1) confers a right of access to the courts — Hindrance of effective exercise of right as an infringement — Whether right of access is absolute or subject to implied limitations — Limitation not to interfere with substance of a protected right
Interpretation of the Convention — Cognisance of Articles 31 to 33 of Vienna Convention on Law of Treaties — Interpretation of treaty as a unity — Comparison of French and English texts of Article 6(1) — Relationship of this to other Articles of the Convention — Significance of Preamble to the Convention as regards interpretation — The phrase “rule of law” — Principle of good faith — Importance of the concept of “rule of law” in the context of the Council of Europe — “General principles of law recognised by civilised nations” in the context of the Convention
Article 8 (respect for correspondence) — Impeding initiation of correspondence an “interference” within Article 8(2) — Whether there are implied limitations additional to those set out in Article 8(2) — Application of limitations in Article 8(2) — Power of appreciation left to Contracting States — Appraisal of necessity of interference by the Government — Legitimacy of taking into consideration the ordinary and reasonable requirements of imprisonment in applying the stated limitations
Article 50 (just satisfaction) — Question ready for decision and thus not reserved — The finding of violations of the Applicant's rights in the matter sufficient satisfaction
Keywords
- Type
- Case Report
- Information
- Copyright
- © Cambridge University Press 1980