Globalisation and Court Practice in Iceland: New Case Law of the Supreme Court in Relation to the EEA Agreement and European Convention on Human Rights
Abstract This article examines the status of international treaties in Iceland law and how Icelandic court practice has developed in recent years in that area. With regard to the relationship between domestic law and international law, Iceland adheres to the principle of dualism. This means that int...
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Book Part |
| Language: | unknown |
| Published: |
Springer International Publishing
2021
|
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-74851-7_9 https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/978-3-030-74851-7_9 |
| Summary: | Abstract This article examines the status of international treaties in Iceland law and how Icelandic court practice has developed in recent years in that area. With regard to the relationship between domestic law and international law, Iceland adheres to the principle of dualism. This means that international law does not come into force as Icelandic law unless implemented by the legislator. As a result, Icelandic Courts will not, in general, apply provisions of international treaties unless they have been incorporated into Icelandic statutory law. However, this does not mean that international obligation are not fulfilled, as Icelandic Courts will seek to interpret domestic law in line with international obligation to the extent possible. If an international treaty has been implemented into Icelandic law, its provisions are binding like other domestic law. With regard to the EEA Agreement, Icelandic Courts will seek to interpret national law in accordance with EEA obligations and follow the judgments of the EFTA Court if the Icelandic provision in question is open to such an interpretation. With regard to the European Convention on Human Rights, Icelandic Courts will even go a step further, as recent judgments show that Icelandic Courts tend to interpret the human rights provisions of the Icelandic Constitution in line with interpretation laid down by The European Court of Human Rights, even in cases where such an interpretation does not exactly fit within the direct wording of the provision in question. This is due to a special connection between the human rights chapter of the Icelandic Constitution and the Convention, as one of the legislators’ main goals when amending the Constitution in 1994 was to bring the human rights chapter more in line with the Convention. |
|---|