Skip to main content

Abstract

This article looks at the cross-fertilisation that exists between the case law of the European Court of Human Rights interpreting the European Convention on Human Rights and that of the European Court of Justice when it examines cases with a human rights element under the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union. The Court in Strasbourg has looked to the provisions of the Charter to inform its interpretation of the Convention in cases concerning same-sex marriage, the rights of members of the civil service to sue their employers, the application of Article 6 to proceedings concerning interim measures and the application of the “more lenient penalty” rule in criminal law. At the same time the European Court of Justice has sought to apply the Charter with reference to the case law of the Strasbourg Court in the application of the principle of homogeneity set out in Article 52 § 3 of the Charter. The current practice is mutually enriching for both Courts, as well as for the level of human rights protection throughout Europe, and can be seen as a form of judicial dialogue that will undoubtedly be enhanced when accession of the European Union to the Convention comes about.

President of the European Court of Human Rights.

I would like to thank Ms Andreea Arghir, of the Registry of the Court, for her invaluable assistance in preparing this article.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    For several examples concerning courts of the Member States of the European Union, see Cassia and von Coester 2012, p. 503.

  2. 2.

    ECtHR, Procola v. Luxembourg, no. 14570/89, 28 September 1995, Series A no. 326, and ECtHR, Cantoni v. France [GC], no. 17862/91, Reports of Judgments and Decisions 1996-V.

  3. 3.

    ECtHR, Matthews v. the United Kingdom [GC], no. 24833/94, ECHR 1999-1.

  4. 4.

    ECtHR, Bosphorus Hava Yolları Turizm ve Ticaret Anonim Şirketi v. Ireland [GC], no. 45036/98, ECHR 2005-VI.

  5. 5.

    For a list, see Ziemele 2011, p. 743, pp. 741–758.

  6. 6.

    ECtHR, Golder v. the United Kingdom, no. 4451/70, 21 February 1975, Series A no. 18.

  7. 7.

    See Ziemele 2011, p. 752.

  8. 8.

    ECtHR, Demir and Baykara v. Turkey [GC], no. 34503/97, 12 November 2008.

  9. 9.

    ECtHR, Slivenko v. Latvia [GC], no. 48321/99, § 105, 9 October 2003, ECHR 2003-X.

  10. 10.

    ECtHR, Diallo v. the Czech Republic, no. 20493/07, § 76, 23 June 2011.

  11. 11.

    ECtHR, Schalk and Kopf v. Austria, no. 30141/04, 24 June 2010.

  12. 12.

    ECtHR, Christine Goodwin v. the United Kingdom [GC], no. 28957/95, ECHR 2002-VI.

  13. 13.

    See previous reference.

  14. 14.

    ECtHR, Vilho Eskelinen and Others v. Finland [GC], no. 63235/00, 19 April 2007.

  15. 15.

    CJEC, 15 May 1986, Marguerite Johnston v. Chief Constable of the Royal Ulster Constabulary, Case C-222/84.

  16. 16.

    ECtHR, Micallef v. Malta [GC], no. 17056/06, 15 October 2009.

  17. 17.

    CJEC, 21 May 1980, Denilauler v. Couchet, Case C-125/79.

  18. 18.

    ECtHR, Scoppola v. Italy (no. 2) [GC], no. 10249/03, 17 September 2009.

  19. 19.

    CJEC, 3 May 2005, Berlusconi and Others, joined Cases C-387/02, C-391/02 and C-403/02.

  20. 20.

    ECtHR, Bayatyan v. Armenia [GC], no. 23459/03, 7 July 2011.

  21. 21.

    Lock 2009, p. 384, pp. 375–398.

  22. 22.

    Skouris 2009, p. 53, pp. 37–56.

  23. 23.

    Benoît-Rohmer 2011, p. 160, pp. 145–172.

  24. 24.

    Rosas and Kaila 2011, p. 9.

  25. 25.

    CJEU, 5 October 2010, McB. v. L.E., Case C-400/10 PPU.

  26. 26.

    Council Regulation (EC) No 2201/2003 of 27 November 2003 concerning jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in matrimonial matters and the matters of parental responsibility, repealing Regulation (EC) No 1347/2000 (OJ L 338, p. 1).

  27. 27.

    ECtHR, Guichard v. France (dec.), no. 56838/00, 2 September 2003; Balbontin v. the United Kingdom (dec.), no. 39067/97, 14 September 1999; and Zaunegger v. Germany, no. 22028/04, 3 December 2009.

  28. 28.

    CJEU, 9 November 2010, Volker und Markus Schecke and Eifert, joined Cases C-92/09 and C-93/09.

  29. 29.

    ECtHR, Amann v. Switzerland [GC], no, 27798/95, 16 February 2000; Rotaru v. Romania [GC], no. 28341/95, 4 May 2000; and Gillow v. the United Kingdom, no. 9063/80, 24 November 1986.

  30. 30.

    CJEU, 21 December 2011, N.S. v. Secretary of State for the Home Department and M.E. and Others v. Refugee Applications Commissioner and Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform, joined Cases C-411/10 and C-493/10.

  31. 31.

    Council Regulation (EC) No 343/2003 of 18 February 2003 establishing the criteria and mechanisms for determining the Member State responsible for examining an asylum application lodged in one of the Member States by a third-country national (OJ L 50, p. 1).

  32. 32.

    ECtHR, M.S.S. v. Belgium and Greece [GC], no. 30696/09, 21 January 2011.

References

  • Benoît-Rohmer F (2011) L’Union européenne et les droits fondamentaux depuis l’entrée en vigueur du Traité de Lisbonne. Revue trimestrielle de droit européen 1/2011:145–172

    Google Scholar 

  • Cassia P, von Coester S (2012) L’application de la Charte des droits fondamentaux de l’Union européenne par le juge national. La Semaine Juridique 10/2012:503–509

    Google Scholar 

  • Lock T (2009) The ECJ and the ECtHR: The Future Relationship between the Two European Courts. The Law and Practice of International Courts and Tribunals 8/2009:375–398

    Google Scholar 

  • Rosas A, Kaila H (2011) L’application de la Charte des droits fondamentaux de l’Union européenne par la Cour de justice: un premier bilan. Il Diritto dell’Unione Europea 1/2011:9

    Google Scholar 

  • Skouris V (2009) Speech given at the seminar organised by the European Court of Human Rights to mark its fiftieth anniversary. Dialogue between judges, Council of Europe

    Google Scholar 

  • Ziemele I (2011) Other rules of international law and the European Court of Human Rights: a question of a simple collateral benefit? In: The European convention on human rights, a living instrument (liber amoricum Christos Rozakis). Bruylant, Brussels

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Sir Nicolas Bratza .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2013 T.M.C. Asser Instituut

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Sir Nicolas Bratza (2013). The European Convention on Human Rights and the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union: A Process of Mutual Enrichment. In: The Court of Justice and the Construction of Europe: Analyses and Perspectives on Sixty Years of Case-law - La Cour de Justice et la Construction de l'Europe: Analyses et Perspectives de Soixante Ans de Jurisprudence. T.M.C. Asser Press, The Hague, The Netherlands. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-90-6704-897-2_11

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Societies and partnerships