European Court of Human Rights judgement on discrimination regarding the right to education

February 1st, 2018 § 0 comments § permalink

In the case of Enver Şahin v. Turkey (application no. 23065/12), the Court found that there had been discrimination concerning the right to education owing to the inability of the applicant, a paraplegic person, to gain access to the university buildings for the purposes of his studies owing to the lack of suitable facilities (a violation of Article 14 (prohibition of discrimination) of the European Convention on Human Rights, read in conjunction with Article 2 of Protocol No. 1 (right to education)).

The Court found in particular that the Government had not demonstrated that the national authorities, and in particular the university and judicial authorities, had reacted with the requisite diligence in order to ensure that Mr Şahin could continue to enjoy his right to education on an equal footing with other students.

Firstly, a proposal by the rector’s office to provide a person to assist him had not been made following an assessment of Mr Şahin’s actual needs and an honest appraisal of the potential impact on his safety, dignity and independence. Secondly, the domestic courts had not ascertained whether a fair balance had been struck between the competing interests of the applicant (his educational needs) and of society as a whole.

Furthermore, they had omitted to look for possible solutions that would have enabled the applicant to resume his studies under conditions as close as possible to those provided to students with no disability, without imposing an undue or disproportionate burden on the administration. press-release

CCBE position on the Morgenbesser case law, 11/09/2015

September 22nd, 2015 § 0 comments § permalink


Source: Court of Justice of the European Union

In its position of 11 September 2015, the CCBE “recognises that Bars and Law Societies must ensure that they comply with their EU obligation and seeks to ensure that Bars and Law Societies consider, and properly assess, applications from semi-qualified candidates who wish to start or continue their legal training outside their home jurisdictions. The CCBE notes that such qualifications should be assessed “having regard to the nature and duration of the studies and practical training” (Morgenbesser §§67-68)”. Furthermore, the CCBE “notes that one of the recent amendments to Directive 2005/36/EC on the recognition of Professional Qualifications, by Directive 2013/55/EU, introduced the notion that a ‘professional traineeship’ required for access to a regulated profession carried out in one Member State, access to which could have been facilitated by the Morgenbesser case law, must be recognised by a relevant Competent Authority in another Member State”. (See CCBE position on the Morgenbesser case law (EN, FR) & all information related to the case of Morgenbesser on the CCBE website.)