欧洲共识:一种推理方式

K. Dzehtsiarou
{"title":"欧洲共识:一种推理方式","authors":"K. Dzehtsiarou","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.1411063","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The margin of appreciation is probably one of the most controversial and widely discussed concepts that has been developed by the European Court of Human Rights. A few books and hundreds of articles1 were written to justify or challenge the margin of appreciation. European consensus argument has always operated in the shadow of the wider concept of margin of appreciation. However European consensus is called to define the landmark signs capable to turn around the ECtHR reasoning. Moreover, European consensus goes far beyond mere determination of the scope of margin of appreciation. Different types of consensus argument assist in defining the meaning of vague conventional terms, approached as a common denominator for autonomous interpretation, measure proportionality of interference. The present article aims to conceptualise the notion of European consensus and structure the divergent references of this concept in the case-law of the European Court of Human Rights.","PeriodicalId":331501,"journal":{"name":"UCD Law Working Papers in Law","volume":"11 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2009-05-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"European Consensus: A Way of Reasoning\",\"authors\":\"K. Dzehtsiarou\",\"doi\":\"10.2139/SSRN.1411063\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The margin of appreciation is probably one of the most controversial and widely discussed concepts that has been developed by the European Court of Human Rights. A few books and hundreds of articles1 were written to justify or challenge the margin of appreciation. European consensus argument has always operated in the shadow of the wider concept of margin of appreciation. However European consensus is called to define the landmark signs capable to turn around the ECtHR reasoning. Moreover, European consensus goes far beyond mere determination of the scope of margin of appreciation. Different types of consensus argument assist in defining the meaning of vague conventional terms, approached as a common denominator for autonomous interpretation, measure proportionality of interference. The present article aims to conceptualise the notion of European consensus and structure the divergent references of this concept in the case-law of the European Court of Human Rights.\",\"PeriodicalId\":331501,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"UCD Law Working Papers in Law\",\"volume\":\"11 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2009-05-28\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"UCD Law Working Papers in Law\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.1411063\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"UCD Law Working Papers in Law","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.1411063","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

摘要

增值幅度可能是欧洲人权法院提出的最具争议和广泛讨论的概念之一。有人写了几本书和数百篇文章来证明或挑战这种升值幅度。欧洲的共识论点一直是在更广泛的升值幅度概念的阴影下运作的。然而,欧洲共识被要求定义能够扭转欧洲人权法院推理的标志性标志。此外,欧洲的共识远远超出了仅仅确定升值幅度的范围。不同类型的共识论点有助于定义模糊的传统术语的含义,作为自主解释的共同分母,衡量干扰的比例性。本文旨在概念化欧洲共识的概念,并在欧洲人权法院的判例法中构建这一概念的不同参考。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
European Consensus: A Way of Reasoning
The margin of appreciation is probably one of the most controversial and widely discussed concepts that has been developed by the European Court of Human Rights. A few books and hundreds of articles1 were written to justify or challenge the margin of appreciation. European consensus argument has always operated in the shadow of the wider concept of margin of appreciation. However European consensus is called to define the landmark signs capable to turn around the ECtHR reasoning. Moreover, European consensus goes far beyond mere determination of the scope of margin of appreciation. Different types of consensus argument assist in defining the meaning of vague conventional terms, approached as a common denominator for autonomous interpretation, measure proportionality of interference. The present article aims to conceptualise the notion of European consensus and structure the divergent references of this concept in the case-law of the European Court of Human Rights.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信