Talk:Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Murray v UK[edit]

Changing link to John Murray v United Kingdom as it is that article that references article 6, not the one currently linked --Topperfalkon (talk) 15:29, 17 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Question[edit]

What is the definition of a 'civil obligation'. I cited article 6 in an application for a Judicial Review of a Coroners' decision NOT to hold an inquest into a relative's death in hospital, and was told that it was not applicable, because a) i was not facing a criminal charge, and b) the decision not to hold an inquest, nor the inquest itself, determined my civil rights or obligations. My Father was drugged into a state of unconciousness in a hospital, then assessed to be incapacitated, so that a junior could keep his surgeon's waiting lists down by acting in my fathers' 'best interests', and refusing him admission to intensive care. I held an advance medical directive for my Father, and promised him as he lay dying that i would bring them to book for neglect. I felt I had a 'civil obligation' to see that his death was adequately investigated, but there were 13 errors and omissions in the clinical summary acompanying the coroners post mortem report, no histology was conducted to confirm that a mass on his kidney was cancerous (we have a family history of benign growths), the toxicology tests were not even capable of qualitatively detecting two drugs, let alone quantitating them (both supress respiration), it stated my father had lost 3 kg weight prior to admssion to hospital (compatible with highly systemic 'cancer'), whereas his GP records prove he had gained this amount (compatible with rude health). The post mortem 'clinicla summary ' made no mention of a 'pulmonary embolism' he suffered in hospital, yet one was found in the physical examination. The Clinicla summary made no mention of 'septicaemia', yet he was described as having this in a letter the junior sent to his GP after his death. The Coroners' Expert was not a Consulant Pathologist, had no RCPath membership or training, but was merely a GP who worked for the same NHS area authority. Worse still, he didnt actually look at my late Fathers medical records - no one did - the Coroner just got on the telephone to the man I was accusing of wilful neglect/manslaughter, AND ASKED HIM TO WRITE AN ACCOUNT OF MY FATHERS MEDICAL TREATMENT.

It appears the Human Rights Act does not extend to the dead - ie my Father has no rights to a competent Post Mortem or Inquest. The Coroner however had no response at all, save for the fact that because I couldnt get a solicitor to assist, I had to act as a litigant in person, and was refused copies of my late fathers medical records, so was late in filing documents at the court. The coroners response merely complained that I had abused correct court procedures, and the case was dismissed!!

Some country Britain was.

I'm very sorry to hear about your loss. The best thing to do is seek proper legal advice. From what you say, it is unlikely that the European Convention on Human Rights helps - although that may not be good news, I think the judge was probably right. The right to a fair trial is for situations where you are accused of a crime (so we make sure we do not imprison innocent people) or you are being sued by someone over property or vice versa. It sounds to me that what you may be alleging is in fact that the hospital is negligent, or that they have deliberately failed to care for your father properly. Without saying anything more, it sounds that what you may be after is bringing a private suit yourself against the hospital - rather than trying to ask for a coroner's inquest. My guess also is that the hospital did not think it was doing anything wrong and almost certainly meant no wrong - although it may be very upsetting. As I say, the best thing would to be to seek professional legal advice from a solicitor. But keep in mind this may be costly, take much time and not amount to anything but more upset for yourself. Wikidea 19:07, 20 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, and to answer your question directly, a civil obligation means something like a right to property or a contract with someone. The rights you have under public law - to seek judicial review or coroners inquests - are not within this scope. Wikidea 19:09, 20 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

History[edit]

Have the Star Chamber and the Spanish inquisition really got anything to do with the history of the European Convention on Human Rights? If so, it needs to be explained. Bluewave (talk) 09:23, 3 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

In the absence of any evidence that the Star Chamber and Inquisition have anything to do with the article, I have now deleted the history section. If anyone disagrees, please revert and discuss. Bluewave (talk) 09:30, 5 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 00:15, 10 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Wiki Education assignment: Legal Europe[edit]

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 29 January 2024 and 15 May 2024. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Gerichtsadler (article contribs).

— Assignment last updated by Gerichtsadler (talk) 23:45, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Article_6_of_the_European_Convention_on_Human_Rights&oldid=1223563208"