Abstract
The Grand Chamber judgment in the Naı¨t-Liman v. Switzerland
case is certainly a much anticipated one. Its outcome had, however,
long been foreshadowed by commentators and practitioners alike. The decision
confirmed the 2016 Chamber’s judgment by holding that the Swiss
Federal Tribunal’s decline of jurisdiction in a civil case involving reparation
for torture committed outside the territory of Switzerland by foreign authorities
against a foreign national did not amount to a violation of Article 6(1)
ECHR. However, the Court’s reasoning in the case under review is susceptible
of being criticized in more than one respect. The compatibility of the
conduct of the Swiss judiciary with Article 6(1) ECHR is dubious to say the
least, even more so since the Federal Tribunal’s restrictive interpretation of
the requirements for the application of forum necessitatis jurisdiction, and
especially of the “sufficient connection” requirement, managed to produce a
fully-fledged denial of justice. Should such a trend gain consistency, the
effectiveness of the right of access to a court may be put at risk.
| Lingua originale | Inglese |
|---|---|
| pagine (da-a) | 349-382 |
| Numero di pagine | 34 |
| Rivista | RIVISTA DI DIRITTO INTERNAZIONALE PRIVATO E PROCESSUALE |
| Volume | 55 |
| Stato di pubblicazione | Pubblicato - 2019 |
OSS delle Nazioni Unite
Questo processo contribuisce al raggiungimento dei seguenti obiettivi di sviluppo sostenibile
-
SDG 16 Pace, giustizia e istituzioni solide
Keywords
- forum necessitatis
Fingerprint
Entra nei temi di ricerca di 'THE ECTHR GRAND CHAMBER’S JUDGMENT IN THE NAI¨TLIMAN CASE: AN UNNECESSARY CLARIFICATION OF THE REACH OF FORUM NECESSITATIS JURISDICTION?'. Insieme formano una fingerprint unica.Cita questo
- APA
- Author
- BIBTEX
- Harvard
- Standard
- RIS
- Vancouver