English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Abstract This article argues that the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) in Jaloud v. Netherlands adopted an attribution test in order to establish jurisdiction under Article 1 of the European Convention on Human Rights. It argues that this would not be the first time that the ECtHR has adopted an attribution test in order to establish Article 1 jurisdiction. Furthermore, the article challenges the proposition that the ECtHR’s adoption of an attribution test to establish jurisdiction is methodologically unsound and not in conformity with international law. It proposes moving beyond this debate and considering the real challenges that an attribution test of Article 1 jurisdiction poses for the future.

The Relationship between Jurisdiction and Attribution after Jaloud v. Netherlands