info image
Case Briefs
info image

Weekly Roundup of Landmark Cases Vol. 2

On a weekly basis, we identify five interesting case briefs for our subscribers and summarize them in a blog. Below you can find an overview of selected judgements from international and regional courts that shape the modern interpretation of law.

Yukhymovych v. Ukraine (ECtHR)

In this decision, the ECtHR raised two questions: whether the use of lethal force against the applicant's son was justified in the circumstances of the case and whether the conducted investigation was effective. In determining the latter, the court considered the length of the investigative actions and certain irregularities in the process.

Occidental v. Ecuador (ICSID)

The Tribunal discussed two possible infringements of rights, id est the right to specific performance and right to non-aggravation, which the Claimant (Occidental Petroleum Corporation) argued were violated. To respond to the Claimant’s request for provisional measures, the Tribunal considered urgency of providing such measures and whether they would cause irreparable harm to any of the parties involved.

Roe v. Wade (US Supreme Court)

In the landmark decision of 1973, the Supreme Court ruled that the US constitution, namely the right to privacy allowed women to decide on terminating pregnancy. The court established a pregnancy trimester timetable which would govern all abortion regulations in the US by determining when abortion is entirely a decision of a woman vs when the government can intervene to regulate it.

Slovenia v. Croatia (ECtHR)

The decision is thought to have determined new admissibility criterion for inter-state applications under the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR).

The application was lodged by Slovenia concerning the unpaid and overdue debts owed to Ljubljanska Banka by Croatian companies. The question is: can a state (Slovenia) lodge an application to protect Ljubljanska Banka’s rights?

M.L v. Norway

The case concerns an applicant diagnosed with an emotionally unstable personality disorder and mild mental retardation, and their rights as a parent.

In this decision, the court raised the question as to whether the member state violated the applicant’s right to private life by depriving them of parental rights when their child was adopted by a foster family.

Thank you for reading our weekly summary. Complete versions of these and other case briefs can be accessed in our case brief library.

Follow our social media to discover more legal content every day.