Lexploria - Legal research enhanced by smart algorithms
Lexploria beta Legal research enhanced by smart algorithms
Menu
Browsing history:

CASE OF CUSTERS, DEVEAUX AND TURK v. DENMARKCONCURRING OPINION OF JUDGE BORREGO BORREGO

Doc ref:ECHR ID:

Document date: May 3, 2007

  • Inbound citations: 0
  • Cited paragraphs: 0
  • Outbound citations: 0

CASE OF CUSTERS, DEVEAUX AND TURK v. DENMARKCONCURRING OPINION OF JUDGE BORREGO BORREGO

Doc ref:ECHR ID:

Document date: May 3, 2007

Cited paragraphs only

CONCURRING OPINION OF JUDGE BORREGO BORREGO

I agree with the majority that, in this case, there has been no violation of Article 7 of the Convention.

Nevertheless, I have to say that I cannot share the majority ' s firmness concerning the quality of the law and the applicants ' entry into the area of the military base.

In my opinion, it is doubtful whether the Travel Order of 1954 could be considered “established practice” within the meaning of Article 117 § 2 and whether it constitutes a sufficient legal basis in domestic law as regards the requirements of accessibility and foreseeability.

I also have doubts with regard to the place where the applicants were arrested, as it is not clear whether this arrest took place inside the air base or close to it, for there is no evidence of an indisputable demarcation on a public map.

However, being a minority of one, I have decided to vote with the majority in spite of my doubts.

© European Union, https://eur-lex.europa.eu, 1998 - 2024
Active Products: EUCJ + ECHR Data Package + Citation Analytics • Documents in DB: 398107 • Paragraphs parsed: 43931842 • Citations processed 3409255