header-logo header-logo

Additional powers for HR judges

10 June 2010
Issue: 7421 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-detail

Judges at the European Court of Human Rights can strike out cases where the applicant has not suffered a “significant disadvantage”, as of this month.

Judges at the European Court of Human Rights can strike out cases where the applicant has not suffered a “significant disadvantage”, as of this month.
The new power can be exercised unless respect for human rights requires an examination of the application on the merits, and provided the case has been considered by a domestic tribunal.

Supporters of the new regime say it will allow the court to concentrate more on cases that “raise important human rights issues, so it can play its role most effectively”.

The change has come about as a result of Protocol No 14 of the European Convention which entered into force at the beginning of the month.
Additionally, judges are now elected to the court for a maximum period of nine years, and may not seek
re-election.

 

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Pillsbury—Steven James

Pillsbury—Steven James

Firm boosts London IP capability with high-profile technology sector hire

Clarke Willmott—Michelle Seddon

Clarke Willmott—Michelle Seddon

Private client specialist joins as partner in Taunton office

DWF—Rory White-Andrews

DWF—Rory White-Andrews

Finance and restructuring offering strengthened by partner hire in London

NEWS
Mazur v Charles Russell Speechlys LLP [2025] EWHC 2341 (KB) continues to stir controversy across civil litigation, according to NLJ columnist Professor Dominic Regan of City Law School—AKA ‘The insider’
SRA v Goodwin is a rare disciplinary decision where a solicitor found to have acted dishonestly avoided being struck off, says Clare Hughes-Williams of DAC Beachcroft in this week's NLJ. The Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal (SDT) imposed a 12-month suspension instead, citing medical evidence and the absence of harm to clients
In their latest Family Law Brief for NLJ, Ellie Hampson-Jones and Carla Ditz of Stewarts review three key family law rulings, including the latest instalment in the long-running saga of Potanin v Potanina
The Asian International Arbitration Centre’s sweeping reforms through its AIAC Suite of Rules 2026, unveiled at Asia ADR Week, are under examination in this week's NLJ by John (Ching Jack) Choi of Gresham Legal
In this week's issue of NLJ, Yasseen Gailani and Alexander Martin of Quinn Emanuel report on the High Court’s decision in Skatteforvaltningen (SKAT) v Solo Capital Partners LLP & Ors [2025], where Denmark’s tax authority failed to recover £1.4bn in disputed dividend tax refunds
back-to-top-scroll