General referred to decisions by the European Court of Human Rights, before the Court of Justice itself in expressly followed the conclusions of the Court of Familiapress Human Rights in and in where the Court of Justice Lentia Criminal Proceeding v X mentioned the interpretation of the Court of Human Rights in Kokkinakis v Greece. The European Court of Human Rights goes further, and important decisions will often have a longer section under the The most important heading ‘Comparative Law’. difference from the EU courts is that the Human Rights Court cites national case law on the interpretation of its own treaty base, the European Human Rights Convention. It also cites decisions from international courts and tribunals (including the European Court of Justice), and of other international bodies and committees. The United Nations Human Rights Committee has a special position in the UN human rights system, and the European Human Rights Court has in a number of cases cited and taken due account of the Human Rights There are interesting examples of dialogues Committee’s decisions. with national courts in the Human Rights recent practice. In a unanimous Cooper Court’s Grand Chamber European Human Rights Court overturned a previous ruling in Morris, making extensive use of Lord analysis in a House of Lords decision, and Bingham’s agreeing with his conclusions. Public International Law recognises state practice as a primary source of law. This entails close study of court decisions as an expression of state practice. However, the International Court of Justice (ICJ) does not cite national court decisions or their application of public international law. Neither has the ICJ traditionally cited decisions by other international tribunals. However, in its Advisory Opinion on Legal Consequences of the Construction of a Wall in the Occupied Palestinian Territory
General referred to decisions by the European Court of Human Rights, before the Court of Justice itself in Familiapress expressly followed the conclusions of the Court of Human Rights in Lentia and in Criminal Proceeding v X where the Court of Justice mentioned the interpretation of the Court of Human Rights in Kokkinakis v Greece. The European Court of Human Rights goes further, and important decisions will often have a longer section under the heading ‘Comparative Law’. The most important difference from the EU courts is that the Human Rights Court cites national case law on the interpretation of its own treaty base, the European Human Rights Convention. It also cites decisions from international courts and tribunals (including the European Court of Justice), and of other international bodies and committees. The United Nations Human Rights Committee has a special position in the UN human rights system, and the European Human Rights Court has in a number of cases cited and taken due account of the Human Rights Committee’s decisions. There are interesting examples of dialogues with national courts in the Human Rights Court’s recent practice. In Cooper a unanimous Grand Chamber European Human Rights Court overturned a previous ruling in Morris, making extensive use of Lord Bingham’s analysis in a House of Lords decision, and agreeing with his conclusions. Public International Law recognises state practice as a primary source of law. This entails close study of court decisions as an expression of state practice. However, the International Court of Justice (ICJ) does not cite national court decisions or their application of public international law. Neither has the ICJ traditionally cited decisions by other international tribunals. However, in its Advisory Opinion on Legal Consequences of the Construction of a Wall in the Occupied Palestinian Territory