Egendomsskyddet : Äganderätten enligt artikel 1 första tilläggsprotokollet till den Europeiska konventionen om de mänskliga rättigheterna

Sammanfattning: The thesis deals with the right of property as defined in Article 1 of the First Protocol to the European Convention on Human Rights. It has two main purposes. The first is to examine the case law that has developed since the important case of Sporrong and Lönnroth in 1982. The second is to ascertain the degree to which the right of property is dependent on the structure of society and the existence of democracy.Many legal issues are examined in the thesis. One essential question concerns the concept of property itself. What kinds of economic interests are protected? Are there any limits to the protection of interests of economic value? What are the implications of interpreting the concept widely? Another important issue is the conditions under which the State may interfere with individual property rights. It is generally accepted that compensation should be paid when an individual is deprived of property. But what criteria govern the amount of compensation necessary to comply with the Convention? What is meant by full compensation? When, if so, can the State avoid liability to pay compensation? The public purpose clauses in Article 1 are also examined. How does the European Court of Human Rights interpret this wide notion of public purpose? Can the State lay claim to any interests it considers worth protecting? Does redistribution of wealth fall within what is meant by publicpurpose? The right of property also come into play when the State taxes its citizens. The question is whether the Convention sets any limits on taxation and, if so, what they are. Are there any limits on high and accumulated taxes? Are there any limits on the purposes for which the taxes are levied? Finally, what role does the principle of proportionality play when interpreting Article 1? Does it mean that the other criteria in Article 1 are subordinate?The thesis also examines the historical and philosophical background of the right of property. Throughout ages there has,been a never-ending discussion as to the role and implications of protecting private property as opposedto an alternative kind of society, based on collective or common ownership. How have these ideas influenced modem protection of property rights?