Foreign Cases

The Social and Economic Rights Action Center for Economic and Social Rights v. Nigeria, Communication No. 155/96, African Commission on Human and Peoples' Rights.

The Communication to the commission alleged that the government of Nigeria had been directly involved in oil production through the State oil company, the Nigerian National Petroleum Company (NNPC), the majority shareholder in a consortium with Shell Petroleum Development Corporation (SPDC), and that these operations caused environmental degradation and health problems resulting from the contamination of the environment among the Ogoni People. The Social and Economic Rights Action Center for Economic and Social Rights v. Nigeria, Communication No. 155/96, African Commission on Human and Peoples' Rights.

Paschim Banga khet Mazdoor Samity versus State of West Bengal 1996 SOL Case No. 169 (Supreme Court of India)

Constitution of the Republic of India - Article 21 - Right to life - Patient denied emergency medical treatment - hospitals without facilities and or space to accommodate patient - whether right to life violated - State bound to preserve human life - seriously injured patients cannot be denied admission on ground of non-availability of beds - state under duty to improve its facilities in light of growing needs - State bound irrespective of financial constraints.

V v Einwohrnergemeine X und Regierunsgrat des Kantons Bern (BGE/ATF 121 I 367, Swiss Federal Court, of 27 October 1995)

Denial of social security to non-nationals - implied constitutional right to minimum conditions of existence - implied from other constitutional rights and constitutional principles - right to life - right to equality and non-discrimination –principle of human dignity - the equality principle as guaranteeing minimum material justice - rule of law - interdependence - justiciability of claims involving resource allocation - minimum core content - right was violated.

Magyar Közlöny Hungarian Constitutional Court (Official Gazette) 56/1995

The Constitutional Court declared that the partial shifting of burdens to insured persons and to employers on the grounds of difficulties encountered in the operation of the social security system is not necessarily unconstitutional provided that it is proportionate and that the reasons behind it are constitutional. In such matters, however, it is a constitutional requirement that those concerned learn of the risk of such a shift in burdens early enough to be able to calculate further risks and to make arrangements for insurance cover.

© 2016 Dullah Omar Institute
CMS Website by Juizi