Doctors can fulfil euthanasia request if patient develops dementia, rules Dutch Supreme Court

BMJ ◽  
2020 ◽  
pp. m1652
Author(s):  
Tony Sheldon
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Dutch Supreme

Supreme Site Services v. Shape (C.J.E.U.)

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-16
Author(s):  
Salim S. Sleiman
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
Preliminary Ruling ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Eu Regulation ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
Recognition And Enforcement ◽  
Dutch Supreme ◽  
Brussels Regulation

On September 3, 2020, following a request from the Dutch Supreme Court, the First Chamber of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) rendered its preliminary ruling in Supreme Site Services and Others v. SHAPE on the interpretation of Articles 1(1) and 24(5) of the European Union (EU) Regulation 1215/2012 on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters (Recast Brussels Regulation).

scholarly journals The networks of human rights and climate change: The State of the Netherlands v Stichting Urgenda, Supreme Court of the Netherlands, 20 December 2019 (19/00135)

2020 ◽  
Vol 22 (3) ◽  
pp. 227-234
Author(s):  
Ole W. Pedersen
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Human Rights ◽  
The Netherlands ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Case Note ◽  
Human Rights Law ◽  
Environmental Rights ◽  
Domestic Courts ◽  
Dutch Supreme

Climate change litigators are increasingly relying on a range of different jurisdictional avenues and legal regimes. The recent Urgenda decision by the Dutch Supreme Court provides a surprisingly rare snapshot of the relevance of human rights law  to climate change litigation. Focusing on the Supreme Court's reliance on the environmental rights case law from the ECHR, this case note argues that climate change and human rights adjudications takes the form of an adjudicatory network. This network creates spaces for domestic courts to develop contingent responses to emerging climate change claims.

scholarly journals The future of climate policymaking in light of Urgenda Foundation v the Netherlands

2020 ◽  
Vol 22 (2) ◽  
pp. 119-124
Author(s):  
Irene Antonopoulos
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Human Rights ◽  
The Netherlands ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Climate Action ◽  
State Obligations ◽  
Tackle Climate Change ◽  
Definition Of ◽  
Dutch Supreme

The decision of the Dutch Supreme Court in The State of the Netherlands v Urgenda Foundation represents a breakthrough and a step forward in addressing the human rights aspects of climate change. The significance of the case has been recognised by commentators and the UN Human Rights Commissioner, who asked for a repeat of Urgenda’s journey in other jurisdictions. Despite the implication that other states have similar obligations to those construed by the Dutch Supreme Court, the influence of the case in other jurisdictions is yet to be seen. This article recognises the significance of the Urgenda case to the definition of state obligations to reduce their greenhouse gas emissions as part of their commitments under the European Convention on Human Rights. In particular, the article discusses the progress made in interpreting Articles 2 and 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights in clarifying state obligations to take decisive measures to tackle climate change in line with their climate action commitments.

The Responsibility of the Netherlands for the Actions of Dutchbat: An Analysis of Nuhanović and Mustafić

2014 ◽  
Vol 14 (3) ◽  
pp. 641-659
Author(s):  
Noelle Higgins
Keyword(s):  
The Netherlands ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
Armed Forces ◽  
The State ◽  
Effective Control ◽  
Attribution Of Responsibility ◽  
Peacekeeping Operations ◽  
First Time ◽  
Court Of Appeal ◽  
Dutch Supreme

In two recent decisions the Dutch Supreme Court confirmed a decision of the Court of Appeal that the acts of Dutchbat in sending three Bosnian men, who were subsequently murdered by the Bosnian-Serb armed forces, away from its compound in Srebrenica in 1995 were attributable to the State. In addition, the Court confirmed that the State acted wrongfully in expelling the men from the compound. These decisions mark the first time an individual government has been deemed responsible for the conduct of its troops involved in a peacekeeping mission. Central to the decision were the issues of the attribution of responsibility, including the question of effective control in peacekeeping operations, and the wrongfulness of the peacekeepers’ actions.

Responsibility of the Netherlands for the Genocide in Srebrenica

2014 ◽  
Vol 18 (3-4) ◽  
pp. 281-289 ◽  
Author(s):  
Otto Spijkers
Keyword(s):  
The Netherlands ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
The State ◽  
District Court ◽  
The Hague ◽  
Dutch Supreme

This article compares the recent judgment of the District Court in The Hague in the case of the Mothers ofSrebrenica Association et al. v. the Netherlands (“Mothers of Srebrenica”) with the judgments of the Dutch Supreme Court of last year in the cases of Mustafić and Nuhanović v. the State of the Netherlands. In both cases the Dutch courts had to address the question of attribution—can you attribute the acts of the Dutch un peacekeepers to the Netherlands? And the Dutch courts needed to assess the wrongfulness of the conduct of the Dutch peacekeepers.

scholarly journals Dutch Supreme Court backs damages for child for having been born

BMJ ◽  
2005 ◽  
Vol 330 (7494) ◽  
pp. 747.1 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tony Sheldon
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Dutch Supreme
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document