Research Repository

The Operational Obligation under Article 2 of the European Convention on Human Rights and Challenges for Coherence ? Views from the English Supreme Court and Strasbourg

Wright, J (2016) 'The Operational Obligation under Article 2 of the European Convention on Human Rights and Challenges for Coherence ? Views from the English Supreme Court and Strasbourg.' Journal of European Tort Law, 7. 58 - 81.

[img]
Preview
Text
[Journal of European Tort Law] The Operational Obligation under Article 2 of the European Convention on Human Rights and Challenges for Coherence – Views from the English Supreme Court and Strasbourg.pdf - Published Version

Download (2MB) | Preview

Abstract

The European Court of Human Rights and the English Supreme Court have expanded the scope of the positive obligation to protect the right to life under art 2 of the Convention. A question of particular concern for public authorities is the extent to which negligent conduct may fall within art 2. Strasbourg principles relating to standing for victims, as well heads of damage (just satisfaction), are more generous than the Fatal Accidents Act 1976 in the UK. The art 2 obligation also mandates consideration of matters which would not be regarded as justiciable under the English common law. This article provides a critique of recent developments in the case law under art 2, both at Strasbourg and in the English Supreme Court, and draws out the consequent challenges for coherence in English law.

Item Type: Article
Subjects: K Law > K Law (General)
Divisions: Faculty of Humanities > Law, School of
Depositing User: Jim Jamieson
Date Deposited: 26 Jul 2016 10:57
Last Modified: 17 Aug 2017 17:25
URI: http://repository.essex.ac.uk/id/eprint/17303

Actions (login required)

View Item View Item