Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights is a provision of the European Convention which protects the right to a fair trial.In criminal law cases and cases to determine civil rights it protects the right to a public hearing before an independent and impartial tribunal within reasonable time, the presumption of innocence, right to silence and other minimum rights for those charged ...
R v Horncastle & Others [2009] UKSC 14 was a decision of the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom regarding hearsay evidence and the compatibility of UK hearsay law with the right to a fair trial under Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR).
On article 6 ECHR he emphasised that the right to a fair trial is a procedural right, not a substantive right, and that because the pawnbrokers were not denied access to court, but only precluded in their substantive right of having a binding agreement, art 6 was not engaged. On prot 1, art 1 ECHR, he held that the right was not violated ...
The European Court of Human Rights ruled in Schalk and Kopf v. Austria that countries are not required to provide marriage licenses for same-sex couples; however, if a country allows same-sex couple marriage it must be done under the same conditions that opposite-sex couples marriage face, [ 43 ] in order to prevent a breach of article 14 ...
The Court of the Judiciary is the court responsible for removing judges from their position if they have committed illegal acts, including gross neglect of duty, corruption in office, habitual drunkenness, commission while in office of any offense involving moral turpitude, gross partiality in office, oppression in office, or other grounds as specified by the state legislature to be removed ...
The Oklahoma Court of Tax Review is a special court in the Oklahoma judiciary charged with hearing disputes involving illegal taxes levied by county and city governments. All tax review cases are sent to the Chief Justice of Oklahoma, who then sends the claim to the presiding judge of the administration district from which the claim originated.
The living instrument doctrine is a method of judicial interpretation developed and used by the European Court of Human Rights to interpret the European Convention on Human Rights in light of present-day conditions. [1] [2] [3] The doctrine was first articulated in Tyrer v.
The ECHR in Strasbourg. Prior to the entry into force on 1 June 2010 of Protocol No. 14 to the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, the EU could not accede to the convention, and thus the European Court of Human Rights did not have jurisdiction to rule on cases brought against the EU.