Overview of Recent Cases before the European Court of Human Rights (January – December 2014)
| Author | Anne Pieter van der Mei |
| Published date | 01 September 2015 |
| Date | 01 September 2015 |
| DOI | http://doi.org/10.1177/138826271501700304 |
| Subject Matter | Article |
European Jour nal of Social Sec urity, Volume 17 (2015), No. 3 385
OVERVIEW OF RECENT CASES BEFORE THE
EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS
(JANUARY – DECEMBER 2014)
A P M*
In 2014 the European Court of Human R ights (ECtHR or Court) did not deliver
landmark rulings establishing new principles relevant for, or overturning previous
jurisprudence on, social sec urity. Rather, the cases that were decided by the ECt HR
con rmed key principles developed in older c ase law and clari ed their practical
meaning and implications by applying these i n new or comparable cases. Notably,
most of the cases decided by the Court in 2014 concerned pension reforms and the
concrete implications of these for indiv iduals.1
1. RIGHT TO PROPERTY
1.1. GENERA L PRINCIPLES
e most important provision from which individua ls may derive rights relating to
social secur ity is Article1 of Protocol No.1 to the European C onvention on Human
Rights (ECHR), which stipulate s that:
‘[E]very natural or legal pers on is entitled to the peacef ul enjoyment of his posses sions.
No one shall be deprive d of his possessions except in the publ ic interest and subject to the
conditions provided for by l aw and by general principles of i nternational law. e preceding
provisions shal l not, however, in any way impair the right of a St ate to enforce such laws as
it deems necessar y to control the use of property i n accordance with the gener al interest or
to secure the pay ment of taxes or other contributions or pena lties.’
* Assoc iate Pro fessor i n EU Law, M aastr icht Cen tre for Eu ropea n law. Addr ess: P.O. Box 616 , 6200 M D
Maastricht, e Netherlands; phone : +31 43 3884832; e-mail: ap.vandermei@ maastrichtu niversity.nl.
1 While not a social sec urity case, readers mig ht also be interested in the judg ment of 4November
2014 in Tarakhel v. Switzerland, Application No. 29217/12, in which t he ECtHR concluded that
Switzerland wou ld breach Article3 ECHR (proh ibition of inhuman and deg rading treatment) if it
were to return asy lum seekers to Italy w ithout rst obtaining individual guarantees that they would
be taken char ge of in a manner appropriate to t he ages of childre n, and that the fa mily would be kept
together.
To continue reading
Request your trial