Limitations Clauses, Evidence, and the Burden of Proof in the European Court of Human Rights

IF 0.1 0 RELIGION Religion & Human Rights Pub Date : 2020-04-23 DOI:10.1163/18710328-bja10007
T. Jeremy Gunn
{"title":"Limitations Clauses, Evidence, and the Burden of Proof in the European Court of Human Rights","authors":"T. Jeremy Gunn","doi":"10.1163/18710328-bja10007","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n Courts and tribunals involved in evaluating whether states have applied limitations clauses appropriately should pay increased attention to the core underlying issues of the parties’ respective burdens of proof, the standards of proof, and identifying which parties are required to prove which assertions. The European Court of Human Rights has not articulated with sufficient clarity the rules of evidence that apply to its proceedings, thereby permitting ad hoc and inconsistent evaluations of issues pertaining to the freedom of religion or belief. The Court should take seriously its obligation to clarify its standards and thereafter apply them.","PeriodicalId":42092,"journal":{"name":"Religion & Human Rights","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.1000,"publicationDate":"2020-04-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1163/18710328-bja10007","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Religion & Human Rights","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1163/18710328-bja10007","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"RELIGION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Courts and tribunals involved in evaluating whether states have applied limitations clauses appropriately should pay increased attention to the core underlying issues of the parties’ respective burdens of proof, the standards of proof, and identifying which parties are required to prove which assertions. The European Court of Human Rights has not articulated with sufficient clarity the rules of evidence that apply to its proceedings, thereby permitting ad hoc and inconsistent evaluations of issues pertaining to the freedom of religion or belief. The Court should take seriously its obligation to clarify its standards and thereafter apply them.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
欧洲人权法院的限制条款、证据和举证责任
参与评估各州是否恰当地适用了限制条款的法院和法庭应更多地关注当事人各自的举证责任、举证标准以及确定哪些当事人需要证明哪些主张等核心基本问题。欧洲人权法院没有充分明确地阐明适用于其诉讼程序的证据规则,从而允许对有关宗教或信仰自由的问题进行临时和不一致的评价。法院应认真对待其澄清其标准并在其后适用这些标准的义务。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
6
期刊最新文献
Religious Conscience or Religious Freedom? The Difference between Official Constitutional Norms and Actual Legal Restrictions in Morocco, Algeria, and Tunisia Navigating the Tensions: Women’s Rights, Religion and Freedom of Religion or Belief Women’s Reproductive Rights and the Legacy of Religion in Ireland: The Eighth Amendment and Its Repeal Human Rights, Islam, and Debates around CEDAW Introduction: Women’s Religious Freedom and Freedom of Religion or Belief
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1