header-logo header-logo

30 June 2011 / Sarah Lowe
Issue: 7472 / Categories: Features , Public , Human rights
printer mail-detail

Life insurance

How does a state protect the right to life, asks Sarah Lowe

The issue of what is required by a state in order to protect the right to life in accordance with Art 2 of the European Convention of Human Rights (the Convention) has been litigated extensively over the years in the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) and domestic courts.

The events at the end of the last century in Northern Ireland have given rise to a plethora of case law around what is required in order to comply with Art 2. One of the leading cases, McCann v UK (1995) 21 EHRR 97 concerned the killing of three suspected IRA terrorists by SAS soldiers. The ECtHR held that in order to protect life in accordance with Art 2 there should be an effective official investigation into deaths which occur as a result of the use of lethal force by the state.

What constituted an effective official investigation was explored further in the cases of Jordan 2003 37 EHRR 52, Kelly v UK

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

NLJ Career Profile: Ken Fowlie, Stowe Family Law

NLJ Career Profile: Ken Fowlie, Stowe Family Law

Ken Fowlie, chairman of Stowe Family Law, reflects on more than 30 years in legal services after ‘falling into law’

Gardner Leader—Michelle Morgan & Catherine Morris

Gardner Leader—Michelle Morgan & Catherine Morris

Regional law firm expands employment team with partner and senior associate hires

Freeths—Carly Harwood & Tom Newton

Freeths—Carly Harwood & Tom Newton

Nottinghamtrusts, estates and tax team welcomes two senior associates

NEWS
Children can claim for ‘lost years’ damages in personal injury cases, the Supreme Court has held in a landmark judgment
The cab-rank rule remains a bulwark of the rule of law, yet lawyers are increasingly judged by their clients’ causes. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian McDougall, president of the LexisNexis Rule of Law Foundation, warns that conflating representation with endorsement is a ‘clear and present danger’
Holiday lets may promise easy returns, but restrictive covenants can swiftly scupper plans. Writing in NLJ this week, Andrew Francis of Serle Court recounts how covenants limiting use to a ‘private dwelling house’ or ‘private residence’ have repeatedly defeated short-term letting schemes
Artificial intelligence (AI) is already embedded in the civil courts, but regulation lags behind practice. Writing in NLJ this week, Ben Roe of Baker McKenzie charts a landscape where AI assists with transcription, case management and document handling, yet raises acute concerns over evidence, advocacy and even judgment-writing
The Supreme Court has drawn a firm line under branding creativity in regulated markets. In Dairy UK Ltd v Oatly AB, it ruled that Oatly’s ‘post-milk generation’ trade mark unlawfully deployed a protected dairy designation. In NLJ this week, Asima Rana of DWF explains that the court prioritised ‘regulatory clarity over creative branding choices’, holding that ‘designation’ extends beyond product names to marketing slogans
back-to-top-scroll