Skip to main content

Evans v. UK – European Court of Human Rights: The Tragedy of Ms Evans: Conflicts and Incommensurability of Rights, Evans v. the United Kingdom, Fourth Section Judgment of 7 March 2006, Application No. 6339/05


Proportionality review and, in particular, ad hoc judicial balancing of competing rights and interests are probably the most celebrated tools propagated by the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) and are currently dominant features of the European discourse on rights. This methodology and its discourse, in fact, have gained such widespread popularity that, although the outcome of Convention-based and other fundamental rights claims is often far from certain, the way they will be treated by judges can be predicted with some confidence.

Recommend this journal

Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this journal to your organisation's collection.

European Constitutional Law Review
  • ISSN: 1574-0196
  • EISSN: 1744-5515
  • URL: /core/journals/european-constitutional-law-review
Please enter your name
Please enter a valid email address
Who would you like to send this to? *



Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 1
Total number of PDF views: 42 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 186 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between September 2016 - 24th November 2017. This data will be updated every 24 hours.