Andere Kunden interessierten sich auch für
![The binding force of the IACHR Court's standards]( "The binding force of the IACHR Court's standards")
The binding force of the IACHR Court's standards40,99 €![Theory of Legal Principles]( "Theory of Legal Principles")
Theory of Legal Principles117,99 €![Domestic Courts and the Interpretation of International Law]( "Domestic Courts and the Interpretation of International Law")
Domestic Courts and the Interpretation of International Law181,99 €![International Disability Law]( "International Disability Law")
International Disability Law198,99 €![The legitimacy of constitutional mutation through judicial interpretation]( "The legitimacy of constitutional mutation through judicial interpretation")
The legitimacy of constitutional mutation through judicial interpretation55,99 €![Controlling the proportionality of limitations on human rights]( "Controlling the proportionality of limitations on human rights")
Controlling the proportionality of limitations on human rights51,99 €![Letters Upon The Interpretation Of The Federal Constitution, Known As The British North America Act, 1867]( "Letters Upon The Interpretation Of The Federal Constitution, Known As The British North America Act, 1867")
Letters Upon The Interpretation Of The Federal Constitution, Known As The British North America Act, 186720,99 €
This study is focused on the relationship between treaty interpretation methods and the protection granted to the plaintiffs by the Inter-American Court of Human Rights in its judgment of Gonzales Lluy et al. v. Ecuador. Based on a case law analysis of the Courts jurisprudence, this study explores judicial interpretation and the possible consequences of this landmark judgment in the protection of disability rights.Findings suggest that in the Gonzales Lluy et al. v. Ecuador case, the Court applied objective procedural-standards to limit the sphere of its judicial freedom with critical results. the study found that since the American Convention does not contain explicit references to the human rights of persons with disabilities, the concept of discrimination or the Court s competence to rule on the violation of the right to education, the Court reached its conclusions by interpreting the American Convention in light of the regional and universal corpus iuris. In so doing, the Court reinforced the concept of legal interpretation as an "art" since it exercised its "creation" power using different means of interpretation in a particular mixed operation.