Bosphorus Hava Yollari Turizm veTicaret Anonim Sirketi v Ireland, App. No. 45036/98, European Court of Human Rights, 30 June 2005

Tobias Lock

Bosphorus Hava Yollari Turizm veTicaret Anonim Sirketi v Ireland, App. No. 45036/98, European Court of Human Rights, 30 June 2005

Tobias Lock

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceeding › Chapter

Abstract / Description of output

Bosphorus is relevant in that the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) introduced the so-called Bosphorus presumption: if a member state of an organization acted in compliance with an obligation arising from its membership and had no discretion, there is a rebuttable presumption that the member state has complied with its obligations under the European Convention on Human Rights provided that the organization itself ensures a protection of fundamental rights equivalent to what the Convention requires. If that is so, the presumption can only be rebutted if this protection was manifestly deficient.

Original language	English
Title of host publication	Judicial Decisions on the Law of International Organizations
Editors	Cedric Ryngaert, Ige F Dekker, Ramses A Wessel, Jan Wouters
Place of Publication	Oxford
Publisher	Oxford University Press
Pages	309-318
ISBN (Print)	9780198743613, 9780198743620
Publication status	Published - 10 Mar 2016

Cite this

@inbook{4d1511f6b60f4115bbc0824c0c8b56b4,

title = "Bosphorus Hava Yollari Turizm veTicaret Anonim Sirketi v Ireland, App. No. 45036/98, European Court of Human Rights, 30 June 2005",

abstract = "Bosphorus is relevant in that the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) introduced the so-called Bosphorus presumption: if a member state of an organization acted in compliance with an obligation arising from its membership and had no discretion, there is a rebuttable presumption that the member state has complied with its obligations under the European Convention on Human Rights provided that the organization itself ensures a protection of fundamental rights equivalent to what the Convention requires. If that is so, the presumption can only be rebutted if this protection was manifestly deficient.",

author = "Tobias Lock",

year = "2016",

month = mar,

day = "10",

language = "English",

isbn = "9780198743613",

pages = "309--318",

editor = "Cedric Ryngaert and Dekker, {Ige F} and Wessel, {Ramses A } and Jan Wouters",

booktitle = "Judicial Decisions on the Law of International Organizations",

publisher = "Oxford University Press",

address = "United States",

}

Bosphorus Hava Yollari Turizm veTicaret Anonim Sirketi v Ireland, App. No. 45036/98, European Court of Human Rights, 30 June 2005. / Lock, Tobias.
Judicial Decisions on the Law of International Organizations. ed. / Cedric Ryngaert; Ige F Dekker; Ramses A Wessel; Jan Wouters. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2016. p. 309-318.

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceeding › Chapter

TY - CHAP

T1 - Bosphorus Hava Yollari Turizm veTicaret Anonim Sirketi v Ireland, App. No. 45036/98, European Court of Human Rights, 30 June 2005

AU - Lock, Tobias

PY - 2016/3/10

Y1 - 2016/3/10

N2 - Bosphorus is relevant in that the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) introduced the so-called Bosphorus presumption: if a member state of an organization acted in compliance with an obligation arising from its membership and had no discretion, there is a rebuttable presumption that the member state has complied with its obligations under the European Convention on Human Rights provided that the organization itself ensures a protection of fundamental rights equivalent to what the Convention requires. If that is so, the presumption can only be rebutted if this protection was manifestly deficient.

AB - Bosphorus is relevant in that the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) introduced the so-called Bosphorus presumption: if a member state of an organization acted in compliance with an obligation arising from its membership and had no discretion, there is a rebuttable presumption that the member state has complied with its obligations under the European Convention on Human Rights provided that the organization itself ensures a protection of fundamental rights equivalent to what the Convention requires. If that is so, the presumption can only be rebutted if this protection was manifestly deficient.

M3 - Chapter

SN - 9780198743613

SN - 9780198743620

SP - 309

EP - 318

BT - Judicial Decisions on the Law of International Organizations

A2 - Ryngaert, Cedric

A2 - Dekker, Ige F

A2 - Wessel, Ramses A

A2 - Wouters, Jan

PB - Oxford University Press

CY - Oxford

ER -

Bosphorus Hava Yollari Turizm veTicaret Anonim Sirketi v Ireland, App. No. 45036/98, European Court of Human Rights, 30 June 2005

Abstract / Description of output

Fingerprint

Cite this