Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t7fkt Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-25T02:53:38.866Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Amuur v. France

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 February 2017

Juliane Kokott
Juliane Kokott*
Affiliation:
University of Düsseldorf
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
International Decisions
Information
American Journal of International Law , Volume 91 , Issue 1 , January 1997 , pp. 147 - 152
Copyright
Copyright © American Society of International Law 1997

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 See the Constitutional Court’s decision of February 25, 1992, which is translated and reprinted in part in the Amuur judgment, Case 17/1995/523/609, para. 21 [hereinafter slip op.].

2 The judgment of the Tribunal de grande instance of Paris of March 25, 1992, is translated and reprinted in part in slip op., para. 22.

3 Quoted in slip op., para. 26.

4 Slip op., para. 26.

5 Quoted in slip op., para. 28.

6 Law No. 92-625 of July 6, 1992, as amended by Law No. 94-1136 of Dec. 27, 1994, Journal Officiel, Dec. 28, 1994, p. 18,535.

7 The full text of the Commission’s opinion and of the dissenting opinion contained in the report is reproduced as an annex to the judgment and will appear in the Reports of Judgments and Decisions for 1996.

8 European Convention on the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, Nov. 4, 1950, 213 UNTS 221.

9 It had done so in the fourth paragraph of the Preamble to its Constitution.

11 See Kai Hailbronner, Einreisevertveigerung und Visumzwang im Asylrecht, in Staat und Völkerrechtsordnung: Festschrift für Karl Doehring (Kai Hailbronner et al. eds., 1989).

12 Judgment of May 14, 1996, 23 Europaische Grundrechte Zeitschrift 271 (1996).

13 Article 66 of the French Constitution reads: “Nobody must be detained arbitrarily. The ordinary courts, guardians of individual liberty, ensure respect for this principle under the conditions prescribed by law” (translation by the author).

14 See Sam Blay & Andreas Zimmermann, Recent Changes in German Refugee Law: A Critical Assessment, 88 AJIL 361 (1994).

15 See Soering v. United Kingdom, 161 Eur. Ct. H.R. (ser. A) para. 35 (1989); Vilvarajah v. United Kingdom, 215 Eur. Ct. H.R. (ser. A) para. 34 (1991); Cruz Varas v. Sweden, 201 Eur. Ct. H.R. (ser. A) paras. 69–70 (1991).

16 See Kai Hailbronner, Non-refoulement and Humanitarian Refugees: Customary International Law or Wishful Legal Thinking?, 26 Va. J. Int’l L. 857 (1986).