Use LEFT and RIGHT arrow keys to navigate between flashcards;
Use UP and DOWN arrow keys to flip the card;
H to show hint;
A reads text to speech;
12 Cards in this Set
- Front
- Back
|
Lopez de sousa case |
Outer reach of right to life the right to health care, reasonable health care measures+access to emergency service, medical treatment. A floor not a ceiling |
|
|
Niteki V poland |
Fund 70% of drug the problem is not immediate so no violation of A 2 positive obligation = hospital regulate, judicial system resolve medical malpractice and prevent from denial of healthcare |
|
|
Sentges boy with no arm |
Lack of personal autonomy vs limited resources, MOA |
|
|
Asiye Genc case |
The baby died bc the denial of medical services leading to death, state fails to ensure medical facility and proper functioning |
|
|
Mehmet |
The pregnant women died, must pay money first, amount to a substantive violation of A 2 lack of a sound investigation and inadequate care |
|
|
Echr |
Provide indirect effect to social protection by extending the scope of convention rights such as prohibition of discrimination of social benefit and guarantees to protect vulnerable people |
|
|
Stec V UK |
A 14+A1 Pro 1 Wide moa bc the right does not include right to acquire property, but if it create a benefit scheme, must do in a manner which is compatible with A 14 UK do it to protect women and it will change soon so no wrong |
|
|
Demir |
Right to engage in collective bargaining, affirmed the fundamental right, municiple servant is not administration of State, the restriction could not impair the very essence of the right to organise. |
|
|
Belene V hungary |
Disability benefit The re-start after 10 years were dismissed, court said it is not proportionate bc it completely deprive of a vulnerable person only significant source of income |
|
|
Belane |
The applicant also act in good faith the state wide margin of appreciation resulted in an excessive individual burden = wrong |
|
|
Finland society |
40% social welfare lower from eu level but the progressive interpretation of the court and use of report from Poland see the gov is working so OK no violate |
|
|
Eurocop V finland |
The right of the organisation must not be impaired, can limit only prescribed by law ans pressing social need, can't deprive their demand for working condition Moa interpret narrowly |
