Vše

Co hledáte?

Vše
Projekty
Výsledky výzkumu
Subjekty

Rychlé hledání

  • Projekty podpořené TA ČR
  • Významné projekty
  • Projekty s nejvyšší státní podporou
  • Aktuálně běžící projekty

Chytré vyhledávání

  • Takto najdu konkrétní +slovo
  • Takto z výsledků -slovo zcela vynechám
  • “Takto můžu najít celou frázi”

Sometimes Even Easy Rule of Law Cases Make Bad Law ECtHR (GC) 15 March 2022, No. 43572/18, Grzęda v Poland

Identifikátory výsledku

  • Kód výsledku v IS VaVaI

    <a href="https://www.isvavai.cz/riv?ss=detail&h=RIV%2F00216224%3A14220%2F22%3A00127539" target="_blank" >RIV/00216224:14220/22:00127539 - isvavai.cz</a>

  • Výsledek na webu

    <a href="https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/european-constitutional-law-review/article/sometimes-even-easy-rule-of-law-cases-make-bad-law/A62008F4A8E2B774D7A4BAC4CB8E209D#article" target="_blank" >https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/european-constitutional-law-review/article/sometimes-even-easy-rule-of-law-cases-make-bad-law/A62008F4A8E2B774D7A4BAC4CB8E209D#article</a>

  • DOI - Digital Object Identifier

    <a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S1574019622000335" target="_blank" >10.1017/S1574019622000335</a>

Alternativní jazyky

  • Jazyk výsledku

    angličtina

  • Název v původním jazyce

    Sometimes Even Easy Rule of Law Cases Make Bad Law ECtHR (GC) 15 March 2022, No. 43572/18, Grzęda v Poland

  • Popis výsledku v původním jazyce

    It is a well-known maxim in the legal world that hard cases make bad law. Yet, this familiar phrase has long been turned upside down as well, as cases that are – by and large – not too difficult may also lead to judgments that are unconvincingly argued or poorly structured. It is especially disheartening to find such judgments in areas where the stakes are high, and even more so when the judgment has been issued through a more authoritative composition, such as a grand chamber. The Grzęda judgment unfortunately checks all of those boxes. Grzęda v Poland Footnote1 was the first Grand Chamber judgment of the European Court of Human Rights on the rule of law crisis in Poland, a topic that has been occupying Europe, together with its two main supranational courts,Footnote 2 for several years now. The case concerned, in essence, the right of access to a court for Mr Grzęda to challenge the ex lege termination of his mandate as a judicial member of the National Council of the Judiciary (Krajowa Rada Sądownictwa). The Grand Chamber, by 16 votes to 1, found a violation of Article 6(1) ECHR. While the outcome of the judgment can certainly be agreed with, the Court’s reasoning fails to convince on several key points. When one reads the judgment, the feeling that remains is that the Court seemed to have wanted to make this case about more than it was, thereby diluting the clarity of its own legal reasoning.

  • Název v anglickém jazyce

    Sometimes Even Easy Rule of Law Cases Make Bad Law ECtHR (GC) 15 March 2022, No. 43572/18, Grzęda v Poland

  • Popis výsledku anglicky

    It is a well-known maxim in the legal world that hard cases make bad law. Yet, this familiar phrase has long been turned upside down as well, as cases that are – by and large – not too difficult may also lead to judgments that are unconvincingly argued or poorly structured. It is especially disheartening to find such judgments in areas where the stakes are high, and even more so when the judgment has been issued through a more authoritative composition, such as a grand chamber. The Grzęda judgment unfortunately checks all of those boxes. Grzęda v Poland Footnote1 was the first Grand Chamber judgment of the European Court of Human Rights on the rule of law crisis in Poland, a topic that has been occupying Europe, together with its two main supranational courts,Footnote 2 for several years now. The case concerned, in essence, the right of access to a court for Mr Grzęda to challenge the ex lege termination of his mandate as a judicial member of the National Council of the Judiciary (Krajowa Rada Sądownictwa). The Grand Chamber, by 16 votes to 1, found a violation of Article 6(1) ECHR. While the outcome of the judgment can certainly be agreed with, the Court’s reasoning fails to convince on several key points. When one reads the judgment, the feeling that remains is that the Court seemed to have wanted to make this case about more than it was, thereby diluting the clarity of its own legal reasoning.

Klasifikace

  • Druh

    J<sub>imp</sub> - Článek v periodiku v databázi Web of Science

  • CEP obor

  • OECD FORD obor

    50501 - Law

Návaznosti výsledku

  • Projekt

  • Návaznosti

    V - Vyzkumna aktivita podporovana z jinych verejnych zdroju

Ostatní

  • Rok uplatnění

    2022

  • Kód důvěrnosti údajů

    S - Úplné a pravdivé údaje o projektu nepodléhají ochraně podle zvláštních právních předpisů

Údaje specifické pro druh výsledku

  • Název periodika

    European Constitutional Law Review

  • ISSN

    1574-0196

  • e-ISSN

    1744-5515

  • Svazek periodika

    18

  • Číslo periodika v rámci svazku

    4

  • Stát vydavatele periodika

    GB - Spojené království Velké Británie a Severního Irska

  • Počet stran výsledku

    27

  • Strana od-do

    753-779

  • Kód UT WoS článku

    000891160600001

  • EID výsledku v databázi Scopus

    2-s2.0-85143915693