Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-cphqk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-11T18:55:53.122Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Evans v. UK – European Court of Human Rights

The Tragedy of Ms Evans: Conflicts and Incommensurability of Rights, Evans v. the United Kingdom, Fourth Section Judgment of 7 March 2006, Application No. 6339/05

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  14 December 2006

Jacco Bomhoff  and
Lorenzo Zucca
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

Proportionality review and, in particular, ad hoc judicial balancing of competing rights and interests are probably the most celebrated tools propagated by the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) and are currently dominant features of the European discourse on rights. This methodology and its discourse, in fact, have gained such widespread popularity that, although the outcome of Convention-based and other fundamental rights claims is often far from certain, the way they will be treated by judges can be predicted with some confidence.

Keywords

EvansEuropean Court of Human RightsConflict of RightsIncommensurabilityEuropean Discourse on RightsIn Vitro FertilisationFundamental RightsDilemmasRights of PrivacyBright-line RulesFair BalancePretty
Type
Case Notes
Information
European Constitutional Law Review , Volume 2 , Issue 3 , October 2006 , pp. 424 - 442
Copyright
Asser Press 2006