Proszę używać tego identyfikatora do cytowań lub wstaw link do tej pozycji:
http://hdl.handle.net/11320/15640
Pełny rekord metadanych
Pole DC | Wartość | Język |
---|---|---|
dc.contributor.author | Wiśniewski, Adam | - |
dc.date.accessioned | 2023-12-20T09:05:48Z | - |
dc.date.available | 2023-12-20T09:05:48Z | - |
dc.date.issued | 2023 | - |
dc.identifier.citation | Białostockie Studia Prawnicze, Vol. 28 nr 4, 2023, s. 11-33 | pl |
dc.identifier.issn | 1689-7404 | - |
dc.identifier.uri | http://hdl.handle.net/11320/15640 | - |
dc.description.abstract | In comparison to the European Convention on Human Rights, the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights, which provides in its Article 16 for the freedom to conduct a business, is a much more modern instrument. In this article I argue that the Convention nevertheless appears to be no less important a document offering protection of entrepreneurs’ rights. This is the case even though it does not provide any particular rights devoted to the running of a business by entrepreneurs. This is possible, first of all, due to the right of individual application which may be lodged directly with the European Court of Human Rights in its capacity as an international court. No comparable measure for an individual complaint is available under the UN Charter. Secondly, the extensive case law of the Strasbourg Court has made it possible for entrepreneurs to rely on a number of Convention rights, despite the fact that these rights, at least at first glance, are not connected with the running of a business. This refers not only to the right to a fair trial on the protection of property, which offer entrepreneurs the protection of a number of their interests, but also to rights which at first glance have nothing to do with the running of the business, such as the right to respect for private and family life protected under Article 8 of the Convention. As a result, the right of individual complaint to the ECtHR should be perceived as an important measure of the protection and enforcements of entrepreneurs’ rights at the international level, in case of any failure to secure the protection of those rights at the national level. | pl |
dc.language.iso | en | pl |
dc.publisher | Faculty of Law, University of Białystok; Temida 2 | pl |
dc.rights | Uznanie autorstwa-Użycie niekomercyjne-Bez utworów zależnych 4.0 | - |
dc.rights.uri | https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ | - |
dc.subject | entrepreneurs | pl |
dc.subject | European Convention on Human Rights | pl |
dc.subject | European Court of Human Rights | pl |
dc.subject | individual complaint | pl |
dc.subject | human rights | pl |
dc.title | The Protection of Entrepreneurs and the European Convention on Human Rights | pl |
dc.type | Article | pl |
dc.rights.holder | © 2023 Adam Wiśniewski published by Sciendo. This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 License. | pl |
dc.identifier.doi | 10.15290/bsp.2023.28.04.01 | - |
dc.description.Email | adam.wisniewski@prawo.ug.edu.pl | pl |
dc.description.Affiliation | University of Gdańsk, Poland | pl |
dc.description.references | Bajorek-Ziaja H., Skarga do Europejskiego Trybunału Praw Człowieka oraz skarga do Trybunału Sprawiedliwości Unii Europejskiej, Warsaw 2010. | pl |
dc.description.references | Bodnar A., Ploszka A., Wpływ Europejskiej Konwencji Praw Człowieka na funkcjonowanie biznesu, Warsaw 2016. | pl |
dc.description.references | Decision of the Court of 1 July 2010 on the case of Korolev v. Russia, application no. 2555/05. | pl |
dc.description.references | Decision of the ECtHR of 13 January 2005 on the case of Emesa Sugar N.V. v. the Netherlands, application no. 62023/00. | pl |
dc.description.references | Decision of the ECtHR of 23 September 2003 on the case of Radio France and Others v. France, application no. 53984/00. | pl |
dc.description.references | Deshko L., Application of Legal Entities to the European Court of Human Rights: A Significant Disadvantage as the Condition of Admissibility, ‘Croatian International Relations Review’ 2018, vol. 24, no. 83. | pl |
dc.description.references | European Court of Human Rights, Guide on Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights. Right to a Fair Trial (Civil Limb), Council of Europe 2022, p. 14, https://www.echr.coe.int/documents/guide_art_6_eng.pdf | pl |
dc.description.references | European Court of Human Rights, Practical Guide on Admissibility Criteria, https://www.echr.coe.int/documents/admissibility_guide_eng.pdf. | pl |
dc.description.references | European Law Institute, Business and Human Rights: Access to Justice and Effective Remedies, Report of the European Law Institute 2022, https://www.europeanlawinstitute.eu/fileadmin/user_upload/p_eli/Publications/ELI_Report_on_Business_and_Human_Rights.pdf. | pl |
dc.description.references | Garlicki L., Wartości lokalne a orzecznictwo ponadnarodowe – ‘kulturowy margines oceny’ w orzecznictwie strasburskim? ‘Europejski Przegląd Sądowy’ 2008, no. 4. | pl |
dc.description.references | Garlicki L. (ed.), Konwencja o Ochronie Praw Człowieka i Podstawowych Wolności, vol. I: Komentarz do artykułów 1–19, Warsaw 2011. | pl |
dc.description.references | Gronowska B., Pozycja jednostki w systemie procedury kontrolnej Europejskiej Konwencji Praw Człowieka z 1950 r., (in:) Balcerzak M., Czeczko-Durlak A. (eds.), Księga Jubileuszowa Prof. dra hab. Tadeusza Jasudowicza, Toruń 2004. | pl |
dc.description.references | Harris D., O’Boyle M., Bates E., Buckley C., Law of the European Convention on Human Rights, Oxford 2018. | pl |
dc.description.references | Judgment of the ECtHR of 26 June 1992 on the case of Drozd and Janousek v. France and Spain, application no. 12747/87 | pl |
dc.description.references | Judgment of the ECtHR of 24 October 1995 on the case of Agrotexim and Others v. Greece, application no. 14807/89. | pl |
dc.description.references | Judgment of the ECtHR of 24 February 2009 on the case of Dacia S.R.L. v. Moldova, application no. 3052/04. | pl |
dc.description.references | Judgment of the ECtHR of 15 November 2011 on the case of Hovhannisyan and Shiroyan v. Armenia, application no. 5065/06. | pl |
dc.description.references | Judgment of the ECtHR of 23 January 2014 on the case of East/West Alliance Limited v. Ukraine, application no. 19336/04. | pl |
dc.description.references | Judgment of the ECtHR of 28 May 2019 on the case of Liblik and Others v. Estonia, application no. 173/15. | pl |
dc.description.references | Judgment of the ECtHR (Grand Chamber) of 13 November 2007 on the case of D.H. and Others v. the Czech Republic, application no. 57325/00. | pl |
dc.description.references | Judgment of the ECtHR (Grand Chamber) of 7 June 2012 on the case of Centro Europa 7 S.R.L. and Di Stefano v. Italy, application no. 38433/09. | pl |
dc.description.references | Judgment of the ECtHR (Grand Chamber) of 19 December 2017 on the case of Lopes de Sousa Fernandes v. Portugal, application no. 56080/13. | pl |
dc.description.references | Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 7 July 2020 on the case of Albert and Others v. Hungary, application no. 5294/14. | pl |
dc.description.references | Judgment of the ECtHR of 6 July 1971 on the case of Ringeisen v. Austria, application no. 2614/65. | pl |
dc.description.references | Judgment of the ECtHR of 28 June 1978 on the case of König v. Germany, application no. 6232/73. | pl |
dc.description.references | Judgment of ECtHR of 6 September 1978 on the case of Klass and Others v. Germany, application no. 5029/71. | pl |
dc.description.references | Judgment of the ECtHR of 22 October 1981 on the case of Dudgeon v. the United Kingdom, application no. 7525/76. | pl |
dc.description.references | Judgment of the ECtHR of 23 September 1982 on the case of Sporrong and Lönnroth v. Sweden, application no. 7152/75. | pl |
dc.description.references | Judgment of the ECtHR of 7 July 1989 on the case of Tre Traktörer Aktiebolag v. Sweden, application no. 10873/84. | pl |
dc.description.references | Judgment of the ECtHR of 20 November 1989 on the case of Markt Intern Verlag Gmbh and Klaus Bermann v. Germany, application no. 10572/83. | pl |
dc.description.references | Judgment of the ECtHR of 21 January 1999 on the case of García Ruiz v. Spain, application no. 30544/96. | pl |
dc.description.references | Judgment of the ECtHR of 12 July 2001 on the case of Ferrazzini v. Italy, application no. 44759/98. | pl |
dc.description.references | Judgment of the ECtHR of 16 April 2002 on the case of S.A. Dangeville v. France, application no. 36677/97. | pl |
dc.description.references | Judgment of the ECtHR of 28 July 2005 on the case of Rosenzweig and Bonded Warehouses Ltd. v. Poland, application no. 51728/99. | pl |
dc.description.references | Judgment of the ECtHR of 9 March 2006 on the case of Eko-Elda Avee v. Greece, application no. 10162/02. | pl |
dc.description.references | Judgment of the ECtHR of 5 April 2012 on the case of Chambaz v. Switzerland, application no. 11663/04. | pl |
dc.description.references | Judgment of the ECtHR of 23 February 2017 on the case of de Tommaso v. Italy, application no. 43395/09. | pl |
dc.description.references | Judgment of the ECtHR of 18 August 2017 on the case of Jóhannesson and Others v. Iceland, application no. 22007/11. | pl |
dc.description.references | Judgment of the ECtHR of 23 May 2019 on the case of Sine Tsaggarakis A.E.E. v. Greece, application no. 17257/13. | pl |
dc.description.references | Judgment of the ECtHR of 10 September 2019 on the case of Pryanishnikov v. Russia, application no. 5047/05. | pl |
dc.description.references | Judgment of the ECtHR of 9 March 2021 on the case of Bilgen v. Turkey, application no. 1571/07. | pl |
dc.description.references | Judgment of the ECtHR of 22 July 2021 on the case of Reczkowicz v. Poland, application no. 43447/19. | pl |
dc.description.references | Judgment of the ECtHR of 16 April 2022 on the case of Société Colas Est and Others v. France, application no. 37971/97. | pl |
dc.description.references | Judgment of the ECtHR (Grand Chamber) of 16 December 1992 on the case of Niemietz v. Germany, application no. 13710/88. | pl |
dc.description.references | Judgment of the ECtHR (Grand Chamber) of 29 April 2008 on the case of Burden v. the United Kingdom, application no. 13378/05. | pl |
dc.description.references | Judgment of the ECtHR (Grand Chamber) of 17 July 2014 on the case of Centre for Legal Resources on Behalf of Valentin Câmpeanu v. Romania, application no. 47848/08. | pl |
dc.description.references | Judgment of the ECtHR (Grand Chamber) of 15 March 2022 on the case of Grzęda v. Poland, application no. 43572. | pl |
dc.description.references | Notes for Filling in the Application Form, https://www.echr.coe.int/Documents/Application_Notes_ENG.pdf. | pl |
dc.description.references | O’Brien C.M., Business and Human Rights: A Handbook for Legal Practitioners, Council of Europe, Strasbourg, 2018. | pl |
dc.description.references | Randall M.H., Commercial Speech under the European Convention on Human Rights: Subordinate or Equal? ‘Human Rights Law Review’ 2006, vol. 6, no. 1. | pl |
dc.description.references | Resolution of the Supreme Court of 30.11.2010, III CZP 16/10. | pl |
dc.description.references | United Nations Office of the High Commissioner, Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights: Implementing the United Nations ‘Protect, Respect and Remedy’ Framework, New York/Geneva 2011, https://www.ohchr.org/sites/default/files/documents/publications/guidingprinciplesbusinesshr_en.pdf. | pl |
dc.identifier.eissn | 2719-9452 | - |
dc.description.volume | 28 | pl |
dc.description.number | 4 | pl |
dc.description.firstpage | 11 | pl |
dc.description.lastpage | 33 | pl |
dc.identifier.citation2 | Białostockie Studia Prawnicze | pl |
dc.identifier.orcid | 0000-0002-4921-0215 | - |
Występuje w kolekcji(ach): | Białostockie Studia Prawnicze, 2023, Vol. 28 nr 4 |
Pliki w tej pozycji:
Plik | Opis | Rozmiar | Format | |
---|---|---|---|---|
BSP_28_4_A_Wisniewski_The_Protection_of_Entrepreneurs.pdf | 275,25 kB | Adobe PDF | Otwórz |
Pozycja ta dostępna jest na podstawie licencji Licencja Creative Commons CCL