How proportional is proportionality?

Bendor, Ariel L.; Sela, Tal

doi:10.1093/icon/mov028

Cited by 8 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…55 Конституции России сформулировано общее основание ограничения прав человека федеральным законом только в той мере, в какой это необходимо в целях защиты основ конституционного строя, нравственности, здоровья, прав и законных интересов других лиц, обеспечения обороны страны и безопасности государства. Современная доктрина, а также судебная практика при ограничении конституционных прав исходят из обязательного соблюдения принципа соразмерности ограничений прав (Barak, 2012;Bendor, Sela, 2015:530-544), контекстуального и целевого характера применяемых ограничений.…”

Section: ограничение права на тайну связиunclassified

Legal Regulation of Communication Privacy in the Information Society

Izotova

Николаевна²

2020

Vestn. Ross. univ. družby nar., Ser. Ûrid. nauki

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The article is devoted to the regulation of communication privacy, which is not only a guarantee of the individual right to confidentiality and privacy, but also a necessary condition for the collective freedom of speech, trust in communication services, which is essential for formation of the information society. The right to communication privacy with the advent of new communication technologies is being transformed and expanded, which requires updating and harmonization of the legal framework. In this regard, the purpose of the research is to reveal problems and contradictions in updating legal regulation of communication privacy, including by analyzing legislation and existent scientific approaches to the content of communication privacy, description of mechanisms for both ensuring and limiting communication privacy, as well as interaction of legal entities regarding communication privacy. The relationship between Russian and European legislation, which regulate communication privacy (ePrivacy) have been considered in this paper. The research methodology is represented by such methods as dialectical, analysis, analogies, formal-legal, comparative methods of research activity. The work demonstrates different approaches to determining the content of the right to communication privacy, expanding the range of professional subjects of communication privacy, and loosening the mechanisms for limiting this right in the direction of its expansion in the context of interrelations between subjects of legal relations concerning communication privacy.

show abstract

Section: ограничение права на тайну связиunclassified

Legal Regulation of Communication Privacy in the Information Society

Izotova

Николаевна²

2020

Vestn. Ross. univ. družby nar., Ser. Ûrid. nauki

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…2 The role of balancing in the protection of personal data is enormous. It is widely used by European courts to resolve disputes arising in the application of the data protection right 3 . It is also the basis for harmonization of pan-European and national laws; it is used to establish the correct correlation between the interests of the European Union and a member country.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Balancing Personal Data Protection with Other Human Rights and Public Interest: Between Theory and Practice

Justickis

2020

Baltic Journal of Law &Amp; Politics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The role of balancing in the development and application of European data protection is enormous. European courts widely use it; it is the basis for harmonization of pan-European and national laws, plays a crucial role in everyday data protection. Therefore, the correctness of a huge number of critical decisions in the EU depends on the perfection of the balancing method. However, the real ability of the balancing method to cope with this mission has been subjected to intense criticism in the scientific literature. This criticism has highlighted its imperfections and casts doubt on its suitability to optimize the relation between competing rights. Paradoxically, the everyday practice of balancing tends to ignore this criticism. The limitations of the balancing method are typically not discussed and are not taken into account when considering legal cases and solving practical issues. Thus, it is tacitly assumed that the shortcomings and limitations of the balancing method, which the criticism points out, are irrelevant when making real-life decisions. This article discusses the scope of this phenomenon, its manifestations, and its impact on the quality of data protection decisions based on the balancing method:sub-optimality of these decisions, their opacity, public dissatisfaction with the legal regulation, its instability and low authority The ways of bridging the gap between the practice of balancing and science and broader consideration by the practice of the shortcomings of the balancing method identified during scientific discussions are considered.

show abstract

Core Socio-Economic Rights and the European Court of Human Rights</I>

Leijten

2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

How proportional is proportionality?

Cited by 8 publications

References 0 publications

Legal Regulation of Communication Privacy in the Information Society

Legal Regulation of Communication Privacy in the Information Society

Balancing Personal Data Protection with Other Human Rights and Public Interest: Between Theory and Practice

Core Socio-Economic Rights and the European Court of Human Rights</I>

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About