GLOSSARY ENTRY (DERIVED FROM QUESTION BELOW) | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
22:35 Oct 26, 2010 |
Spanish to English translations [PRO] Law/Patents - Law (general) | |||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| ||||||
| Selected response from: Parrot Spain Local time: 12:42 | ||||||
Grading comment
|
direct enforceability/implementation is not allowed Explanation: Más opciones. Saludos |
| |
Login to enter a peer comment (or grade) |
opposes/has opposed direct enforcement Explanation: Spain has recognized the judgments of the ECHR but opposes direct enforcement of them |
| |
Login to enter a peer comment (or grade) |
direct execution is not admitted Explanation: The ECHR is a tribunal between states. You may want to read the info on proceedings below. As I read your question, bringing the judgment to the Ombudsman's office is the proper step to take. -------------------------------------------------- Note added at 1 day15 hrs (2010-10-28 14:11:58 GMT) Post-grading -------------------------------------------------- Caveat: I originally understood "no se admite" as not admissible, but all Member States must uphold the judgments of the ECHR. The glitch in the system is, that if the judgment obliges a private party, it may not be within the jurisdiction of a national court to enforce. On the other hand, with a firm sentence, judgment or ruling, ANYONE can go complain to the Ombudsman. Reference: http://www.echr.coe.int/ECHR/EN/Header/The+Court/How+the+Cou... |
| |
Grading comment
| ||
Login to enter a peer comment (or grade) |
Login or register (free and only takes a few minutes) to participate in this question.
You will also have access to many other tools and opportunities designed for those who have language-related jobs (or are passionate about them). Participation is free and the site has a strict confidentiality policy.