Results found: 1

Search results

Search:
in the keywords: reasonable timeframe

Sort By:

Limit search:

European Council’s member states’ jurisdiction regarding the execution of court decisions and it’s issues

100%

Gazidede A.

Academicus. International Scientific Journal

2016

issue 13

103-111

European Court of Human Rights states that the execution of final decisions is a compulsory provision for a fair hearing and a successful conlusion of a trial. The right to a court protected by Article 6 would be illusory if a Contracting State’s domestic legal system allowed a final, binding judicial decision to remain inoperative to the detriment of one party. Execution of a judgment given by any court, is considered to be an integral part of the “trial” for the purposes of Article 6. Based on the Article 1 of European Convention for Human Rights member states of European Council are obligated to implement the the decisions of ECHR in their domestic legislation in the context of building an efficient legal system. This paper aimes to analyze the legal system of member states regarding the reinforcment of decisions looking forword to identify issues, commonalities and diferences among states. What is the procedure followed in the process of execution? What do we understand with “Reasonable timeframe” and which are the legal requirements in which are based “Concrete deadlines” within a judicial decision should be executed? What is the significance of the enforcment agents in this process?

Refine search results

1 Academicus. International Scientific Journal

1 Gazidede A.

1 2016

Search results

European Council’s member states’ jurisdiction regarding the execution of court decisions and it’s issues