Margin of appreciation

Margin of appreciation

Margin of Appreciation is a concept the European Court of Human Rights has developed when considering whether a member state of the European Convention on Human Rights has breached the convention. The margin of appreciation doctrine allows the court to take into effect the fact that the Convention will be interpreted differently in different member states. Judges are obliged to take into account the cultural, historic and philosophical differences between Strasbourg and the nation in question.[1] Margin of Appreciation is similar in concept to, but should not be confused with Subsidiarity.

The Doctrine was used for the first time in the case Handyside v. United Kingdom which concerned the publication of a book aimed at school children, a chapter of which discussed sexual behaviour in explicit terms. The ECHR were willing to allow a limitation of freedom of expression in the interests of the protection of public morals.[2]

Contents

Concept

Margin of appreciation is the word-for-word English translation of the French phrase "marge d'appreciation", a concept used in a number of courts in Europe, among them the European Court of Human Rights and the European Union courts in Luxembourg. It means, roughly, the range of discretion.

The European Union courts, which are the General Court (previously known as the Court of First Instance) and the European Court of Justice, use French as the "language of the court." All decisions are drafted in French and then translated to the appropriate other EU languages. In a number of cases, the courts have had to decide the "marge d'appreciation" of the European Union executive, which is the European Commission. In particular, the concept of "marge d'appreciation" has been used in competition cases. The Commission may bar large company mergers, or fine companies engaged in cartels or abuse of dominance. On occasion companies appeal the Commission decisions to the courts. Sometimes the court decisions have taken note of range of discretion of the Commission. The court has said that the Commission has some discretion—its "marge d'appreciation"—over deciding facts and making an economic analysis. The court has said the Commission can be reversed only if it makes a "manifest error of judgment."

In practice, it has sometimes used both these phrases as it has clipped the wings of the Commission. The best examples of this are three cases decided by the Court of First Instance (now known as the General Court) in 2002, the Airtours/First Choice case, the Tetra Laval-Sidel case, and the Schneider-Legrand case. The decisions, in which the Commission decisions were overturned, are available in French, English and other languages on the court's official website.

For more controversial topics, such as cases involving bioethics or assisted reproduction, the Court recognises that to make a definitive stance for all contracting States would mean ignoring the social and cultural values which lie behind the decisions of national legislatures.

“Where, however, there is no consensus within the Member States of the Council of Europe, either as to the relative importance of the interest at stake or as to how best to protect it, the margin will be wider. This is particularly so where the case raises complex issues and choices of social strategy: the authorities' direct knowledge of their society and its needs means that they are in principle better placed than the international judge to appreciate what is in the public interest… There will also usually be a wide margin accorded if the State is required to strike a balance between competing private and public interests or Convention rights.” - Dickson v. United Kingdom[3]

See also

References

External links


Wikimedia Foundation. 2010.

Игры ⚽ Поможем написать курсовую

Look at other dictionaries:

  • margin of appreciation — England, Wales A concept developed by the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) when considering whether a signatory of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) has breached the declaration in the ECHR. The doctrine allows the ECtHR to… …   Law dictionary

  • French law on secularity and conspicuous religious symbols in schools — The French law on secularity and conspicuous religious symbols in schools bans wearing conspicuous religious symbols in French public (i.e. government operated) primary and secondary schools. The law is an amendment to the French Code of… …   Wikipedia

  • European Court of Human Rights — Not to be confused with the European Court of Justice, the highest court of the European Union. European Court of Human Rights Established 1959 (initially) 1998 (permanent) …   Wikipedia

  • Demir and Baykara v Turkey — Court European Court of Human Rights Date decided 12 November 2008 Citation(s) [2008] …   Wikipedia

  • European Convention on Human Rights — ECHR redirects here. For the Court which enforces the Convention, see European Court of Human Rights. Not to be confused with European Convention (1999 2000) or Convention on the Future of Europe. European Convention on Human Rights The… …   Wikipedia

  • Donald Nicholls, Baron Nicholls of Birkenhead — Donald James Nicholls, Baron Nicholls of Birkenhead, PC (born 25 January 1933), is a British lawyer and retired Law Lord (Lord of Appeal in Ordinary). Contents 1 Biography 2 Judgments 3 Cases 4 Publications …   Wikipedia

  • Kay v. Lambeth LBC — was a legal case involving claims for possession by Lambeth LBC against a group of former short life occupiers . [ [http://www.clarkewillmott.com/sectors/real estate/housing associations/introduction/articles.html?Article=917 Home sweet home?] ]… …   Wikipedia

  • Campbell v. MGN Ltd. — Campbell v Mirror Group Newspapers Ltd [2004] UKHL 22 was a House of Lords decision regarding human rights and privacy in English law. Facts Well known model Naomi Campbell was photographed leaving a rehabilitation clinic, following public… …   Wikipedia

  • Mosley v United Kingdom — (unreported, dated 10th May 2011) was a 2011 decision in the European Court of Human Rights regarding the right to privacy under Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights. An application to the court was made by Max Mosley, former… …   Wikipedia

  • Evans v United Kingdom — Evans v. the United Kingdom was a key case at the European Court of Human Rights. The case outcome could have had a major impact on fertility law, not only within the United Kingdom but also the other Council of Europe countries. Professor John… …   Wikipedia

Share the article and excerpts

Direct link
Do a right-click on the link above
and select “Copy Link”