IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/indlaw/v50y2021i1p36-69..html
   My bibliography  Save this article

An Emerging Human Right to Protection against Unjustified Dismissal

Author

Listed:
  • Hugh Collins

Abstract

Although a right to protection against unjustified dismissal is not widely recognised in human rights law, the European Court of Human Rights has begun to use Article 8 of the European Convention of Human Rights to develop a general right based on the adverse consequences to ordinary private life caused by an unjustified dismissal. Instead of requiring the employer’s reason for the dismissal to be connected to an aspect of an employee’s private and family life in order to engage Article 8, the Court’s new, broader approach focuses on major adverse effects or consequences caused by dismissals to an employee’s family life, personal and professional relationships, to self-respect, and to their chosen way of life and career. The consequence-based approach permits the application of Article 8 whatever reason the employer puts forward for the dismissal. The article assesses the extent and limits of the protection against unjustified dismissal under the Convention as a result primarily of this extension from a reason-based approach to a consequence-based approach to Article 8, an approach that was confirmed by the Grand Chamber in Denisov v Ukraine.

Suggested Citation

  • Hugh Collins, 2021. "An Emerging Human Right to Protection against Unjustified Dismissal," Industrial Law Journal, Industrial Law Society, vol. 50(1), pages 36-69.
  • Handle: RePEc:oup:indlaw:v:50:y:2021:i:1:p:36-69.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/indlaw/dwaa003
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:oup:indlaw:v:50:y:2021:i:1:p:36-69.. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/ilj .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.