No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
Lithgow and Others
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 01 January 2021
Abstract
Expropriation — Compensation — European Convention on Human Rights, 1950 — Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 — Requirement that taking of property be in the public interest — Whether importing duty to pay compensation — Duty to maintain reasonable balance between public interest and the rights of the individual — Implied duty to pay compensation for expropriated property — Measure of compensation — International law standard of compensation — Whether incorporated in Article 1 — Whether international law standard applicable to the taking by a State of the property of its own nationals — Whether State entitled to pay compensation at less than the full market value for property taken from nationals — Valuation of property — Margin of appreciation of expropriating State — Court’s role limited to determining whether that margin has been exceeded — Nationalization of shares in aircraft and shipbuilding companies — Valuation based upon value of shares during reference period rather than value of companies’ assets — Reference period ending more than three years before nationalization took effect — No allowance made for changes in value or inflation during the intervening period — Whether unfair — United Kingdom Aircraft and Shipbuilding Industries Act 1977
Human rights — Property rights — Right to peaceful enjoyment of possessions — Right not to be deprived of property except in the public interest — Whether duty to pay compensation in cases of deprivation of property — Discrimination — Scope of prohibition — Differentiation based upon objective and reasonable grounds not discriminatory — Alleged discrimination in compensation arrangements between owners of different assets nationalized or compulsorily acquired — Right to a hearing — Scope and extent — Whether extending to right to challenge validity of legislation in courts — Whether requirement that disputes be settled by arbitration tribunal an unreasonable denial of right of access to courts — Whether tribunal impartial, independent and efficient — Requirement that shareholders in nationalized company act collectively through stockholders’ representative — Whether a violation of individual’s right to a hearing — Enforcement of human rights — Right to a remedy under national law — Abuse of rights — European Convention on Human Rights, 1950, Articles 6, 13, 14, 17 and 18 — Protocol No. 1, Article 1
Treaties — International — Ordinary meaning of words — Travaux préparatoires — Subsequent practice — European Convention on Human Rights, 1950
Keywords
- Type
- Case Report
- Information
- Copyright
- © Cambridge University Press 1987