Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-ndw9j Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-06T12:58:22.669Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A WRONG TURNING: ARTICLE 3 ECHR AND PROPORTIONALITY

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  29 June 2006

Stephanie Palmer
Stephanie Palmer
Affiliation:
University of Cambridge.
Get access

Abstract

THE right not to be subjected to torture or to inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment is guaranteed in absolute terms in Article 3 of the ECHR. This article imposes on a State both a negative and a positive obligation. In recent months, the House of Lords has considered cases raising both obligations pursuant to Article 3. This paper will examine first the nature of Article 3 and these obligations, second the jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights on the issue of State responsibility, and finally the recent decisions of the House of Lords in R. (on the application of Adam, Limbuela and Tesema) v. Secretary of State for the Home Department

Type
Articles
Information
The Cambridge Law Journal , Volume 65 , Issue 2 , July 2006 , pp. 438 - 452
Copyright
Cambridge Law Journal and Contributors 2006

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.)