Ehrl Card Set 3

Front 1

Hassan V UK

Back 1

The applicant alleged that his brother was arrested and detained by British forces in Iraq and subsequently found dead in unexplained circumstances.

Front 2

Hassan A 1

Back 2

Period BTW xcapture by British troops and admission to Camp Buccca, Hassan was within the physical power and control of the UK soldier and fell withiin UK jurisdiction.

Period after admission to Camp Bucca : he is British troop's prisoner, the UK had retained authority and control over all aspect of detention. So in jurisdiction, the protection of the convention applied.

Front 3

Loizidou A1+A8

Back 3

The concept of jurisdiction under article 1 is not restricted to the national territory of HCP. Responsibility may also arise when as a consequence of military action, whether lawful or unlawful, HCP exercise effective control of an area. Therefore the obligation to secure the rights and freesoms set out in the Convention derived from the fact of such control

Bc TRNC authorities was supported by Turkish force

Front 4

Loizidou

Back 4

The event subsequently prevent her to return to her home town, court rule that the meaning of home in A8 extend to comprise property on which it is planned to build a house for residential purposes.

However, the home that mentioned is just hometown which no longer anyone live her, the court shall protect her only if it was a house that she planned to build for residential purpose

Front 5

A 1 Cyprus V Turkey

Back 5

A 1 effective overall control over Northern Cyprus lead to secure the entire range of substantive rights set out in the Convention.

Any other finding would result in a regrettable vacuum in the system of human-rights protection in the territory in question.

Front 6

Al-Sadoon case

Back 6

Same as Hassan was in total and exclusive

Front 7

Stock V Germany

Back 7

Not limited to the national territory of the HCP, but extends to all persons under its actual authority and responsibility, whether this authority is exercised on its own territory or aboard.

Authorised agents of a state not only remain under its jurisdiction when aboard but bring any other person "within the jurisdiction" to the extent that they exercise authority over such person

Front 8

Ocalan case

Back 8

After he had been handed over by the Kenyan officials to the Turkish officials the applicant was under effective Turkish authority and was therfore brought within the jurisdiction>> was physically forced to return to Turkey and was subjected to their authority and control.

Front 9

Issa

Back 9

Not within jurisdiction

. The court started from the concept of jurisdiction under the Convention was not restricted to the national territory.

The essential question to be examined in the instant case is whether at the relevant time, The Turkish troops conducted operations in the area where the killing took place or not.

The court can't determined from Video, bullet marks and sheird that the killing was done by gunfire come from Turkish troops. So not under court jurisdiction

Front 10

Al-askeini

Back 10

5 people death by the acts of UK outside camp, one died at UKilitary based

In that time, the UK assumed authority and responsibility for the maintianance of security in Iraq. A jurisdictional link existed btw the UK and individuals killed in the course of the security operation

Front 11

Isaak Case

Back 11

Isaak beaten to death by Turkish citizens and TRNC officials

Occurred in UK-controlled buffer zone.

Despite the presence of the Turkish armed forces and TRNC, nothing was done.

The court considers that the deceased was under the authority and or effective control of the respondent state through its agent

Front 12

Andreou case

Back 12

The applicant was shot by Turkish soilder, she is in Cyprus while TRNC is in UN buffer zone.

Even Turkey exercised no control, the opening of fire in the crowd from close range, which was the direct and immediate cause of those injuries, was such the applicant must be regard withing the jurisdiction of Turkey.

Front 13

Al Skeini show both cases

Back 13

Effective control over the arwa and state agent authority and control

Front 14

Jaloud V NL

Back 14

Iraqi was shot death during checkpoint control by NL under UK command

Full command retained by NL

NL asserting authority and control over person A passing through the check point.

Front 15

CPT

Back 15

Front 16

Al-skeini

Back 16

Superseded Bankovic, clarifying the subject

The principle is territorial except

State agent authority and control

Excercise public powers with the consent of territorial state// use of force:: so states are under an obligation to secure individual's rights and freedoms that are relevant to the situation of that individual.

Or Loizidou >> effective control over the area, = entire range

Front 17

Anguelova V Bulgaria

Back 17

Roma boy died in detention

Found a violation on A 2 bc the state failed to meet a burden to provide a satisfactory and convincing explanation for detention register, fail for promptly call for an ambulance.

Ineffective investigation with thorough and careful

Front 18

Burmych case A6+13

Back 18

Pilot after ivanov case no execution, failure to enforce the final judgement

Front 19

Henry Urban case >>

Back 19

Lack of independent of a trial court

Decide the case by an accessory

Front 20

Schuitemaker V the NL

Back 20

Forced labour by mean of social security scheme

Inadmissible»» manifested ill-founded

Must make demonstrable efforts

Front 21

Koksal V NL friendly settlement

Back 21

U

Front 22

Garib V the NL

Back 22

Freedom to choose resident

No violation