Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Human Rights Case Digest

    Uploaded by

    Xyrus Bucao
    37 views1 page
    The case of J.L. vs. Australia concerned an Australian citizen and solicitor who claimed he was a victim of violations under Article 14 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. J.L. refused to pay increased insurance premiums required to obtain his practicing certificate, and continued practicing law without the certificate. He was found in contempt of court and imprisoned for three weeks. The court held that the events occurred prior to Australia's adoption of the Optional Protocol, so it did not constitute a violation of the Covenant. The case of E. and A. Konye V. Hungary involved a Hungarian citizen working for the ILO who was denied a work permit and exit visa when appointed to a new

    Original Description:

    Original Title

    Human Rights Case digest

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOC, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    The case of J.L. vs. Australia concerned an Australian citizen and solicitor who claimed he was a victim of violations under Article 14 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. J.L. refused to pay increased insurance premiums required to obtain his practicing certificate, and continued practicing law without the certificate. He was found in contempt of court and imprisoned for three weeks. The court held that the events occurred prior to Australia's adoption of the Optional Protocol, so it did not constitute a violation of the Covenant. The case of E. and A. Konye V. Hungary involved a Hungarian citizen working for the ILO who was denied a work permit and exit visa when appointed to a new

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOC, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as doc, pdf, or txt
    37 views1 page

    Human Rights Case Digest

    Uploaded by

    Xyrus Bucao
    The case of J.L. vs. Australia concerned an Australian citizen and solicitor who claimed he was a victim of violations under Article 14 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. J.L. refused to pay increased insurance premiums required to obtain his practicing certificate, and continued practicing law without the certificate. He was found in contempt of court and imprisoned for three weeks. The court held that the events occurred prior to Australia's adoption of the Optional Protocol, so it did not constitute a violation of the Covenant. The case of E. and A. Konye V. Hungary involved a Hungarian citizen working for the ILO who was denied a work permit and exit visa when appointed to a new

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOC, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as doc, pdf, or txt
    of 1

    Case digest

    J.L. vs. Austrailia


    Facts:
    J.L., an Australian Citizen and a solicitor assailed to be a victim of Australia of art. 14 of the International
    Covenant on Civil andPolitical Rights. Under the Legal Profession Practice Act of 1958. Pursuant to Sec.
    83(1) which state that no one may practice law unless he or she is duly qualified and holds a certificate
    issued by the Law Institute of Victoria. Under the act, two fees must be paid before practicing certificate
    is issued as well as an annual practicing fee and a compulsory professional indemnity insurance
    premium and pursuant to Sec. 90, anyone without a practicing certificate is not qualified to practice law.
    Along with this stipulation will have no effect unless approved by the Chief Justice.

    In, 1985, Chief Justice approved a new insurance scheme however J.L. refused to pay the increased
    premium for the insurance scheme which in turn the institute refuse to issue the practicing certificate
    however, J.L. continued to practice and on 1986, the Sec. of the Institute obtained an injunction against
    J.L pursuant to the act.

    J.L. ignored the injunction which impelled Chief Justice sentenced him to three week immprosionment
    for contempt of court and prompted J.L. to raise the issue with respect to the date of entry into force of
    the optional protocol for Australia, claiming a violation of Art. 14 of the Covenant.

    Held:
    The event occurred prior to the entry in to force of the Optional Protocol for Australia and therefore it
    does not have themselves constitute a violation of any of the provisions of the covenant.

    E. and A. Konye V. Hungary


    Facts:
    E. and A.K. were Hungarian Citizen where the latter was a staff member of the International Labour
    Office since 1976 up util 1984, each change in his status and each extension of his contract was subject
    to the issuance of a foreign work permit by Hungary. At that time the applicable Hungarian Law, the
    permit was a precondition for the issue of an exit visa by the authorities, which allow them to leave
    together with his family and work abroad.

    A.K. was later appointed in 1984 to established post in ILO, however, Hungary refuse to issue a work
    permit and summoned him to resign from the post and return to Budapest leading A.K. to resign from
    his post in the Hungarian Ministry of Housing and Urban Development.

    On the same year, the municipal police of Budapest declared the Konye to be citizens illegally staying
    abroad prompting the Adminsitration of the Budapest City Council confiscated E. And A. Konye’s
    belonging reverted back to the state where the the authors were denied compensation. Several appeals
    were made by the authors however were of no avail.

    Issue:

    Held:

    You might also like