enow.com Web Search

Search results

  1. Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
  2. Article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Article_3_of_the_European...

    The ECtHR held that, given this exceptional circumstance, his deportation would violate Article 3. The lack of medical facilities in his home country would constitute inhuman and degrading treatment. However, the case of Hristozov v Bulgaria [2012] [ 19 ] illustrates that the prevention of access to experimental cancer drugs would not amount to ...

  3. European Convention on Human Rights - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Convention_on...

    Article 3 prohibits the expulsion of nationals and provides for the right of an individual to enter a country of their nationality. Article 4 prohibits the collective expulsion of foreigners. [60] Turkey and the United Kingdom have signed but never ratified Protocol 4. Greece and Switzerland have neither signed nor ratified this protocol. [61]

  4. European Court of Human Rights - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Court_of_Human_Rights

    The European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR), also known as the Strasbourg Court, [1] is an international court of the Council of Europe which interprets the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR). The court hears applications alleging that a contracting state has breached one or more of the human rights enumerated in the convention or its ...

  5. Soering v United Kingdom - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soering_v_United_Kingdom

    Soering v United Kingdom 161 Eur. Ct. H.R. (ser. A) (1989) is a landmark judgment of the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) which established that extradition of a German national to the United States to face charges of capital murder and their potential exposure to the death row phenomenon violated Article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) guaranteeing the right against ...

  6. Saadi v Italy - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saadi_v_Italy

    Saadi v Italy was a case of the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) decided in February 2008, in which the Court unanimously reaffirmed and extended principles established in Chahal v United Kingdom regarding the absolute nature of the principle of non-refoulement and the obligations of a state under Article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR).

  7. R. (Adam, Limbuela and Tesema) v Secretary of State for the ...

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R._(Adam,_Limbuela_and...

    Article 3 of the ECHR prohibits torture, inhuman or degrading treatment and/or punishment of individuals. [4] In this case, the court observed that due to this refusal of state support, Yusif Adam, Wayoka Limbuela and Binyam Tefera Tesema were exposed to the risk of being homeless, were without access to food and were prevented from working ...

  8. European Union and the European Convention on Human Rights

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Union_and_the...

    The relationship between the ECJ and the ECtHR is potentially an issue in European Union law and human rights law. The ECJ rules on EU law while the ECtHR rules on the ECHR, which covers the 46 member states of the Council of Europe. Cases cannot be brought in the ECtHR against EU institutions (as the EU is not a member in its own right), but ...

  9. List of European Court of Human Rights judgments - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_European_Court_of...

    The Court made awards under Article 41 of the European Convention on Human Rights (just satisfaction) that were substantially lower than those it made in past cases of unlawful detention, in view of the fact that the detention scheme was devised in the face of a public emergency and as an attempt to reconcile the need to protect the United ...