Introductory Note
Introductory Note
The European Court of Human Rights in 2017
This article comments on four important judgments delivered by the Grand Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights in 2017. In the case of Paradiso and Campanelli v. Italy, the Court grappled with sensitive ethical issues of surrogacy and parenthood. The Court’s judgment in the case of Bărbulescu v. Romania set out new detailed principles governing states’ positive obligation to protect privacy in a technologically evolving workplace. In Burmych and Others v. Ukraine, the Court was forced to reflect on its proper place in the human rights machinery of the Council of Europe. Finally, Merabishvili v. Georgia constituted a significant moment in the Court’s understanding of legitimate restrictions of rights.
Keywords: legitimate restriction of rights, online privacy, pilot judgment, positive obligations, surrogacy
Oxford Scholarship Online requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books within the service. Public users can however freely search the site and view the abstracts and keywords for each book and chapter.
Please, subscribe or login to access full text content.
If you think you should have access to this title, please contact your librarian.
To troubleshoot, please check our FAQs , and if you can't find the answer there, please contact us .
