Should negatory action against immissions be reformed in the light of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms and the right to live in a healthy environment?

In this paper, the authors rely on the results of scientific research based on which they concluded that although there are notable differences between the Croatian national regulation of immission protection and the one provided by the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fund...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Mihelčić Gabrijela, Marochini-Zrinski Maša
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Bar Association of Vojvodina, Novi Sad 2022-01-01
Series:Glasnik Advokatske komore Vojvodine
Subjects:
Online Access:https://scindeks-clanci.ceon.rs/data/pdf/0017-0933/2022/0017-09332203767M.pdf
_version_ 1797938612016250880
author Mihelčić Gabrijela
Marochini-Zrinski Maša
author_facet Mihelčić Gabrijela
Marochini-Zrinski Maša
author_sort Mihelčić Gabrijela
collection DOAJ
description In this paper, the authors rely on the results of scientific research based on which they concluded that although there are notable differences between the Croatian national regulation of immission protection and the one provided by the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, and taking into account the role of the Convention (the principle of subsidiarity), it is not inconceivable that protecting this right (which all states are obligated to protect) strengthens the position of the authorized national representative for negatory protection (e.g., the possibility of determining the basis relevant for negatory action in a less complex way; removing discrepancies, such as, for example, the requirement that proprietary legal protection of ownership and other proprietary rights against immissions is preceded by protections pursuant to special regulations, etc.). In this light, the authors analyse recent Convention case-law and compare the regulation of negatory action (protection of property from harassment) with the protection of a specific right established by the Convention - the right to live in a healthy environment based on Article 8 of the Conventionthe right to respect for private and family life, home and correspondence. Exhaustively analysing the right to live in a healthy environment, they explain the interpretative methods and principles used by the European Court in detail, continuing their research concerning this issue. The main focus is on exploring the features of previously postulated rights: the requirement that the human rights protected by the Convention are violated by adverse environmental factors (that is, the existence of a specific Convention causal link); the category of a minimum level of severity; oscillation of this "quantum" of the minimum level of severity within Convention "fluctuations" and the scope (and type) of protection of the right to live in a healthy environment through the paradigm of the positive/negative obligations of the contracting states; naturally, bearing in mind the more recent cases brought before the Court. In conclusion, the authors answer the question postulated in the title of the paper.
first_indexed 2024-04-10T19:02:53Z
format Article
id doaj.art-e9ce6f8f8f904e78be34a89af2ca39c9
institution Directory Open Access Journal
issn 0017-0933
2683-5967
language English
last_indexed 2024-04-10T19:02:53Z
publishDate 2022-01-01
publisher Bar Association of Vojvodina, Novi Sad
record_format Article
series Glasnik Advokatske komore Vojvodine
spelling doaj.art-e9ce6f8f8f904e78be34a89af2ca39c92023-01-31T08:08:20ZengBar Association of Vojvodina, Novi SadGlasnik Advokatske komore Vojvodine0017-09332683-59672022-01-0194376782310.5937/gakv94-389790017-09332203767MShould negatory action against immissions be reformed in the light of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms and the right to live in a healthy environment?Mihelčić Gabrijela0https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7956-2668Marochini-Zrinski Maša1https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8441-2277Sveučilište u Rijeci, Pravni fakultet, Katedra za građansko pravo, Rijeka, HrvatskaSveučilište u Rijeci, Pravni fakultet, Rijeka, Katedra za teoriju države i prava, filozofiju prava, ljudska prava i javnu politiku, HrvatskaIn this paper, the authors rely on the results of scientific research based on which they concluded that although there are notable differences between the Croatian national regulation of immission protection and the one provided by the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, and taking into account the role of the Convention (the principle of subsidiarity), it is not inconceivable that protecting this right (which all states are obligated to protect) strengthens the position of the authorized national representative for negatory protection (e.g., the possibility of determining the basis relevant for negatory action in a less complex way; removing discrepancies, such as, for example, the requirement that proprietary legal protection of ownership and other proprietary rights against immissions is preceded by protections pursuant to special regulations, etc.). In this light, the authors analyse recent Convention case-law and compare the regulation of negatory action (protection of property from harassment) with the protection of a specific right established by the Convention - the right to live in a healthy environment based on Article 8 of the Conventionthe right to respect for private and family life, home and correspondence. Exhaustively analysing the right to live in a healthy environment, they explain the interpretative methods and principles used by the European Court in detail, continuing their research concerning this issue. The main focus is on exploring the features of previously postulated rights: the requirement that the human rights protected by the Convention are violated by adverse environmental factors (that is, the existence of a specific Convention causal link); the category of a minimum level of severity; oscillation of this "quantum" of the minimum level of severity within Convention "fluctuations" and the scope (and type) of protection of the right to live in a healthy environment through the paradigm of the positive/negative obligations of the contracting states; naturally, bearing in mind the more recent cases brought before the Court. In conclusion, the authors answer the question postulated in the title of the paper.https://scindeks-clanci.ceon.rs/data/pdf/0017-0933/2022/0017-09332203767M.pdfthe right to live in a healthy environmentnegatory actionimmissionseuropean court of human rights
spellingShingle Mihelčić Gabrijela
Marochini-Zrinski Maša
Should negatory action against immissions be reformed in the light of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms and the right to live in a healthy environment?
Glasnik Advokatske komore Vojvodine
the right to live in a healthy environment
negatory action
immissions
european court of human rights
title Should negatory action against immissions be reformed in the light of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms and the right to live in a healthy environment?
title_full Should negatory action against immissions be reformed in the light of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms and the right to live in a healthy environment?
title_fullStr Should negatory action against immissions be reformed in the light of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms and the right to live in a healthy environment?
title_full_unstemmed Should negatory action against immissions be reformed in the light of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms and the right to live in a healthy environment?
title_short Should negatory action against immissions be reformed in the light of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms and the right to live in a healthy environment?
title_sort should negatory action against immissions be reformed in the light of the european convention for the protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms and the right to live in a healthy environment
topic the right to live in a healthy environment
negatory action
immissions
european court of human rights
url https://scindeks-clanci.ceon.rs/data/pdf/0017-0933/2022/0017-09332203767M.pdf
work_keys_str_mv AT mihelcicgabrijela shouldnegatoryactionagainstimmissionsbereformedinthelightoftheeuropeanconventionfortheprotectionofhumanrightsandfundamentalfreedomsandtherighttoliveinahealthyenvironment
AT marochinizrinskimasa shouldnegatoryactionagainstimmissionsbereformedinthelightoftheeuropeanconventionfortheprotectionofhumanrightsandfundamentalfreedomsandtherighttoliveinahealthyenvironment