Save
Busy. Please wait.
Log in with Clever
or
show password
Forgot Password?
Don't have an account?  Sign up 
Sign up using Clever
or
Username is available taken
show password


Make sure to remember your password. If you forget it there is no way for StudyStack to send you a reset link. You would need to create a new account. Your email address is only used to allow you to reset your password. See our Privacy Policy and Terms of Service.

Already a StudyStack user? Log In

Reset Password
Enter the associated with your account, and we'll email you a link to reset your password.
focusNode
Didn't know it?
click below
 
Knew it?
click below
Don't Know
Remaining cards (0)
Know
0:00
edit
Embed Code - If you would like this activity on your web page, copy the script below and paste it into your web page.

  Normal Size     Small Size show me how

IHRL Cases

International Human Rights Law Cases

CaseSummary
Yildirim v. Austria CEDAW, 2007, dom. violence, state ratified CEDAW and the optional protocol, failed in its due diligence obligations, violation of art. 2 (duty to pursue policy eliminating discrim) and art. 3 (duty to take appropriate measures for advancement of women)
McCann v. UK ECtHR, 1995, IRA members shot dead in Gibraltar, claimed breach of art. 2 b/c premeditated (no violation) not absolutely necessary (no violation) and operation wasn't planned to minimize force (yes violation)
Gafgen v. Germany ECtHR, 2010, G.Chamber: torture threats fall under art. 3, the police weren't punished enough to meet art. 3, 3 yr delay breached right to remedy for torture, no violation on the admission of evidence (body) obtained by torture b/c evidence not material
Giuliani and Gaggio v. Italy ECtHR, 2009, No violation Art. 2 substantive aspect (excessive use of force), No violation Art. 2 substantive aspect (positive obligation to protect life), Violation of Art. 2 in its procedural aspect (early cremation), G.C. 2011 - no violations?
Vo v. France ECtHR, 2004, hospital mix-up caused miscarriage, court said questions of fetal life must be settled at the state level b/c CoE members disagree on when life begins and there is no scientific consensus, margin of appreciation
Baby Boy Case ACHR, 1981, commission was evaluating whether US abortion laws contravened right to life, ruled no violation b/c "in general"
Opuz v. Turkey ECtHR, 2003, domestic violence case where mother of Opuz shot dead by SIL, court found state responsible b/c they should have foreseen a lethal attack
Oneryildiz v. Turkey ECtHR, 2004, court ruled state failed to protect citizens from risks stemming from dangerous activities, landfill methane explosion killed 39
Osman v. UK ECtHR, 1998, teacher obsessed with son, kills father, court found that authorities ought to have known about the threat to life, "judged reasonably" should have avoided that risk
Rodriguez v. Honduras IACtHR, 1996, famous kidnapping case, due diligence to investigate regardless of who the perpetrators are, key to establishing principle of due diligence
Pretty v. UK ECtHR, 2002, court ruled no right to die
Soering Case ECtHR, 1989, court ruled UK could not extradite to US b/c violation of art. 3, death row phenomenon
Ocalan v. Turkey ECtHR, 2005, court ruled that Turkey had violated art. 3, 5 & 6 of the ECHR by granting Öcalan no effective remedy to appeal his arrest and sentencing him to death without a fair trial
Aydin v. Turkey ECtHR, 1997, rape as torture
Selmouni v. France ECtHR,1999, prisoner beaten and sexually assaulted, court ruled France in violation of art. 3
Zwaan-de Vries v. The Netherlands HRCtee, 2013? (happened 80s), discrimination of social benefits (excluded married women from unemployment), art. 26 ICCPR, basis for the HRC's General Comment on Art. 26- broad scope, any legislation
Dumeric v. Serbia and Montenegro HRCtee, racial discrimination against Roma
Case of A, B, and C ECtHR, 2010, pregnant Irish cancer patient sought info on the risk to her life b/c pregnancy, was denied, court ruled this violated her right to life
Raquel Marti de Meja v. Peru IACHR, rape and intimidation by member of security forces violated art. 5 ACHR
Miguel Castro-Castro Prison v. Peru IACtHR, femaile detainees forced to remain naked under male guard a form of sexual violence, violates art. 5 ACHR
AT v. Hungary CtEDAW, domestic violence, national legislation didn't provide for restraining orders, found breach of CEDAW art. 2 (need for state policy to end discrimination)
M.C. v. Bulgaria ECtHR, 14 y.o. girl raped, couldn't prosecute b/c bad rape definition, use of force rather than consent, state failed in due diligence obligations under art. 3 ECHR
Handyside v. UK ECtHR, first margin of appreciation case, book with sex ed, court let some states limit freedom of expression/ the book b/c convention will be interpreted differently by different states b/c cultural, historic, and philosophical differences
Created by: leechtn
Popular Law sets

 

 



Voices

Use these flashcards to help memorize information. Look at the large card and try to recall what is on the other side. Then click the card to flip it. If you knew the answer, click the green Know box. Otherwise, click the red Don't know box.

When you've placed seven or more cards in the Don't know box, click "retry" to try those cards again.

If you've accidentally put the card in the wrong box, just click on the card to take it out of the box.

You can also use your keyboard to move the cards as follows:

If you are logged in to your account, this website will remember which cards you know and don't know so that they are in the same box the next time you log in.

When you need a break, try one of the other activities listed below the flashcards like Matching, Snowman, or Hungry Bug. Although it may feel like you're playing a game, your brain is still making more connections with the information to help you out.

To see how well you know the information, try the Quiz or Test activity.

Pass complete!
"Know" box contains:
Time elapsed:
Retries:
restart all cards