A Right of the State to Impose Restrictions over the Property Right under the First Protocol to the European Convention on Human Rights
##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.main##
Abstract
The provisions of the European Convention on the Protection of Human Rights and Main Freedoms (hereinafter – the Convention) that guarantees the protection of property rights and occupies one of the highest positions in hierarchy of sources of law of the Republic of Lithuania, granted a possibility to one of our citizens to defend her rights at the international court having failed to find any redress at home (case Jasiuniene v Lithuania, Judgment 6 March 2003).
However, the inclusion of the protection of the property right as one of the human (person’s) rights in the First Protocol of the Convention, but not the text of the Convention itself, symbolizes the dissagreements between the states on the content and expedience of the protection of this right. It is therefore evident that consensus reached caused the conferment upon the States of broad powers to expropriate property, control the use of property and secure payment of taxes. However upon the initiative of the European Court of Human Rights the court has increasingly started to use a general guarantee entrenched in first sentence of Article 1 of the First Protocol for the qualification of the States’ actions that cannot be categorised as expropriation and control of use. In addition the case law indicates the application of a fair balance test as a uniform standard of protection against interference under Article 1 of the First Protocol the content of which differs taking into account the severance of interference.
This article analyses the protection accorded by Article 1 of the First Protocol to the Convention against the restrictions imposed by the State over the property right, establishes the autonomous concept of possessions and explores the content of the minimum European standards developed by this international treaty.
However, the inclusion of the protection of the property right as one of the human (person’s) rights in the First Protocol of the Convention, but not the text of the Convention itself, symbolizes the dissagreements between the states on the content and expedience of the protection of this right. It is therefore evident that consensus reached caused the conferment upon the States of broad powers to expropriate property, control the use of property and secure payment of taxes. However upon the initiative of the European Court of Human Rights the court has increasingly started to use a general guarantee entrenched in first sentence of Article 1 of the First Protocol for the qualification of the States’ actions that cannot be categorised as expropriation and control of use. In addition the case law indicates the application of a fair balance test as a uniform standard of protection against interference under Article 1 of the First Protocol the content of which differs taking into account the severance of interference.
This article analyses the protection accorded by Article 1 of the First Protocol to the Convention against the restrictions imposed by the State over the property right, establishes the autonomous concept of possessions and explores the content of the minimum European standards developed by this international treaty.
##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.details##
Section
Articles
Authors contributing to Jurisprudence agree to publish their articles under a Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivatives 4.0 International Public (CC BY-NC-ND) License, allowing third parties to share their work (copy, distribute, transmit) and to adapt it, under the condition that the authors are given credit, and that in the event of reuse or distribution, the terms of this licence are made clear.
Authors retain copyright of their work, with first publication rights granted to the Association for Learning Technology.
Please see Copyright and Licence Agreement for further details.
Authors retain copyright of their work, with first publication rights granted to the Association for Learning Technology.
Please see Copyright and Licence Agreement for further details.
