Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

Domenech Pardo v. Spain

Domenech Pardo v. Spain 421 12 hrcd [ 2001 ] DOMENECH PARDO v. SPAIN Right to family life – inadmissible Article 8 Orphan’s pension granted from the date of lodging of the application for entitlement rather than from the earlier date of the parents’ death. On 3 May 2001 a Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights declared admissible the application in the case of Domenech Pardo v. Spain . Summary of the facts The applicant benefitted from the right to an orphan’s pension from the date of the presentation of her claim (with a retroactive effect of 3 months). Having filed this demand more than one year and four months after the death of the parents of the orphan, the applicant filed an administrative claim to obtain the remittance of this benefit from the date of the death of the parents. The favorable decision returned at first instance was invalidated on appeal. In support of her amparo claim, the applicant asserted that the delay between the date of the death of the parents and the date of the deposit of her demand was explained by considerations independent of her will which could not be imputed to her. In her submission to the Court, the applicant complained that the refusal of the Spanish courts to recognise the right to an orphan’s pension from the date of the parents’ death but from the date of the filing of the claim was an interference with the right to private and family life guaranteed by Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights. However, the Convention did not guarantee, as such, the right to pension. Section 1 of Article 8 did not exclude that, in some circumstances, the refusal of social insurance, which would benefit an orphan, could pose a problem when, for example, such a refusal would have the effect of making impossible the normal development of the minor’s domestic and private life. In this case, the applicant received the requested pension; there was no element demonstrating that the refusal to grant this pension from the date of the death of the parents of her orphan grandson affected in a serious manner private and family life. Therefore the application was manifestly unfounded. http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Human Rights Case Digest Brill

Domenech Pardo v. Spain

Human Rights Case Digest , Volume 12 (5-6): 421 – Jan 1, 2001
Download PDF
1 page

Loading next page...
 
/lp/brill/domenech-pardo-v-spain-5MUOWyrbRH

References

References for this paper are not available at this time. We will be adding them shortly, thank you for your patience.

Publisher
Brill
Copyright
© 2001 Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, The Netherlands
ISSN
0965-934X
eISSN
1571-8131
DOI
10.1163/157181301401746515
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

421 12 hrcd [ 2001 ] DOMENECH PARDO v. SPAIN Right to family life – inadmissible Article 8 Orphan’s pension granted from the date of lodging of the application for entitlement rather than from the earlier date of the parents’ death. On 3 May 2001 a Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights declared admissible the application in the case of Domenech Pardo v. Spain . Summary of the facts The applicant benefitted from the right to an orphan’s pension from the date of the presentation of her claim (with a retroactive effect of 3 months). Having filed this demand more than one year and four months after the death of the parents of the orphan, the applicant filed an administrative claim to obtain the remittance of this benefit from the date of the death of the parents. The favorable decision returned at first instance was invalidated on appeal. In support of her amparo claim, the applicant asserted that the delay between the date of the death of the parents and the date of the deposit of her demand was explained by considerations independent of her will which could not be imputed to her. In her submission to the Court, the applicant complained that the refusal of the Spanish courts to recognise the right to an orphan’s pension from the date of the parents’ death but from the date of the filing of the claim was an interference with the right to private and family life guaranteed by Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights. However, the Convention did not guarantee, as such, the right to pension. Section 1 of Article 8 did not exclude that, in some circumstances, the refusal of social insurance, which would benefit an orphan, could pose a problem when, for example, such a refusal would have the effect of making impossible the normal development of the minor’s domestic and private life. In this case, the applicant received the requested pension; there was no element demonstrating that the refusal to grant this pension from the date of the death of the parents of her orphan grandson affected in a serious manner private and family life. Therefore the application was manifestly unfounded.

Journal

Human Rights Case Digest – Brill

Published: Jan 1, 2001

There are no references for this article.