Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-l4dxg Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-13T13:13:54.408Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The European Court of Human Rights and Its Contribution to Judicial Fragmentation in International Human Rights Law

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  31 December 2019

Elena Abrusci
Elena Abrusci*
Affiliation:
Human Rights Centre and School of Law-University of Essex (elena.abrusci@essex.ac.uk).
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Following the International Law Commission Report on Fragmentation in International Law (IL), scholars have started to question whether such fragmentation could also have affected its subbranches, and, especially, international human rights law (IHRL). Due to the proliferation of both IHRL norms and institutions, especially at the regional level, this appeared to be a real possibility.

Type
Regional Human Rights Bodies as Instruments of International Law
Information
Proceedings of the ASIL Annual Meeting , Volume 113 , 2019 , pp. 92 - 95
Copyright
Copyright © 2019 by The American Society of International Law

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.)

References

1 See, among others, Towards Convergence in International Human Rights Law: Approaches of Regional and International Systems (Carla M. Buckley, Alice Donald & Philip Leach eds., 2016).

2 Handölsdalen v. Sweden, App. No. 39013/04, Admissibility (Eur. Ct. H.R. 2010).

3 Hingitaq 53 v. Denmark, App. No. 18584/04, Admissibility (Eur. Ct. H.R. 2006).

4 For instance, Mayagna (Sumo) Awas Tingni Community v. Nicaragua, Merits, Reparations and Costs, Judgment, Inter-Am. Ct. H.R. (ser C.) No. 79 (Aug. 31, 2001) or Yakye Axa Indigenous Community v. Paraguay, Merits, Reparations and Costs, Judgment, Inter-Am. Ct. H.R. (ser C.) No. 125 (June 17, 2005).

5 Gender identity, and equality and non-discrimination with regard to same-sex couples. State obligations in relation to change of name, gender identity, and rights deriving from a relationship between same-sex. Advisory Opinion OC-24/17, Inter-Am. Ct. H.R. (ser. A) No. 24 (Nov. 24, 2017).

6 Schalk and Kopf v. Austria, 2010-IV Eur. Ct. H.R. 409; Chapin and Charpentier v. France, 2016-II Eur. Ct. H.R. 215.

7 Id. at 57–60.

8 Advisory Opinion OC-24/17, supra note 5, at 220.

9 Id. at 219.

10 All the following data are based on a study conducted by the author. Further detailed available upon request.