The children speaking French, in Dutch part, they argue should have right to schools. Violation strictly on one area, the French schools nearby. Art 14 with Ar2
2 of 13
Doctrine of effective remedies
Alrey v Ireland- divorce law .. right to go to court but no legal aid.
3 of 13
Positive obligations, evolutive approach
with 3 different rules given by Belgium Linguistic case.
4 of 13
Catan v Moldova and Russia
The official language of the MTR is very wide, but they must write in cyrllic, latin is against the law. Violation, as the language should be favouring the majority.
5 of 13
Secularism in education
Art 2 Pr 1 protects parents convictions also
6 of 13
Folgero v Moldova
Complusory religious classes, parents atheists. Violation, although part exception, bias to one religion. Parents have to review information.
7 of 13
State not obliged to provide extra classes.
Grzelak v Poland- parents agnostics, child removed from classes not offered any alternatives. Held vio of Art 9.
8 of 13
Objections to corporal punishments
Campbell and Cosans
9 of 13
Jehovah witnesses objection to participants in school parade
Valamis
10 of 13
Compulsory sex education
Sex education is beneficary - Kjeldsen
11 of 13
Discrimination in educ- Roma child
DH v Czech Republic - Roma pupils, given a specific test put them in special schools. stats clearly note the discrim area.
12 of 13
Harvath and Kiss v Hungry
Similar to DH. Hostility to a group in the past, this is enough, plus the actual stats
13 of 13
Other cards in this set
Card 2
Front
Belgium Linguistic case
Back
The children speaking French, in Dutch part, they argue should have right to schools. Violation strictly on one area, the French schools nearby. Art 14 with Ar2
Comments
No comments have yet been made