Property Protection as a Limit to Deteriorating Social Security Protection

Tsetoura, Anna

doi:10.1177/138826271301500105

Cited by 5 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 7 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In European countries economic goals tend to supplant other values (Tsetoura 2015). This is now being furthered by the EU's goals pertaining to digital economy in the context of the European Pillar of Social Rights Action Plan (Tsetoura 2022). Various legal, ethical, and societal issues arise concerning whether or not someone can or should have the right to choose regarding the use of new technologies.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Technological Inequality and Social Exclusion of Older People during the COVID-19 Pandemic

Tsetoura¹

2022

The International Journal of Social Quality

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The digital transformation of contemporary societies may already have been seen by older people as an obstacle; during the pandemic, however, great emphasis was given to technology. The purpose of this article is to illustrate the phenomenon of social exclusion of older people, linked to their vulnerability and the “COVID circumstances” and shaped by the various measures imposed by different countries to limit physical contact, which led to technological inequality. The findings emphasize the isolation of the elderly and their non-use or insufficient use of health services and long-term care services. Further implications relate to socioeconomic costs arising from the inefficient treatment of their needs regarding their physical and “technological” vulnerability. The article concludes with considerations of the importance of distinct—both individually and collectively oriented—approaches to create better social conditions that will enhance technological equality for the elderly.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Technological Inequality and Social Exclusion of Older People during the COVID-19 Pandemic

Tsetoura¹

2022

The International Journal of Social Quality

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…98, (1986) 8 EHRR 123. For a review of the Court’s jurisprudence on social security and P1 -1, see Tsetoura (2013); Leijten (2013b: 2019).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Legitimate Expectation and Social Security Law Under the European Convention of Human Rights

Cousins

2020

European Journal of Social Security

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The concept of ‘legitimate expectation’ is one which has developed to different degrees in the domestic laws of contracting states of the Council of Europe. The European Court of Human Rights tends to use the term is two related contexts. First, the Court refers to legitimate expectation as a way of expanding the scope of ‘possessions’ within the meaning of Article 1 of Protocol 1 (P1-1) of the European Convention of Human Rights in order to bring an issue within the purview of the Court. Second, the Court uses the term to refer to a person’s expectations as to the future peaceful enjoyment of their possessions. The failure by the Court to define clearly what it means by the term ‘legitimate expectation’ and its use in two different (if related) ways has led to significant confusion in the Court’s jurisprudence as it concerns social security.

show abstract

The right to minimum subsistence and property protection under the ECHR: Never the twain shall meet?

Leijten

2019

European Journal of Social Security

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article discusses recent developments concerning the right to minimum subsistence as a matter of property protection under the European Convention on Human Rights. It starts with two recent cases: Bélané Nagy v. Hungary and Baczúr v. Hungary. In its judgments in these cases, the European Court of Human Rights emphasised that, in determining whether an interference with a benefit is proportional, an important consideration is whether the individual still receives a subsistence minimum. It moreover held that a right to a (minimum) benefit can exist even if the conditions for receiving this benefit have not been met. Read together, Bélané Nagy and Baczúr flag an increasingly social interpretation of the property right enshrined in Article 1 of the First Protocol to the ECHR involving positive obligations and a focus on the neediest. On a closer look, however, the Court's interpretation is not a very straightforward one. Judgments rendered after Bélané Nagy and Baczúr show that, although there is a clear trend to protect claimants' means of subsistence, the relationship between property and a right to such means remains opaque, and the potential of a property right to guarantee the latter, limited. In this article, I present the recent case law against the background of the increasing significance of Article 1 P1 in the field of social security as well as the obstacles to protecting a subsistence minimum. I will delineate the questions that promise to haunt the Court in the cases to come and explore some of the answers it could formulate in this regard. It is argued that a positive right to a subsistence minimum is, for various reasons, unlikely to be developed as a matter of property protection under the Convention.

show abstract

Property Protection as a Limit to Deteriorating Social Security Protection

Cited by 5 publications

References 7 publications

Technological Inequality and Social Exclusion of Older People during the COVID-19 Pandemic

Technological Inequality and Social Exclusion of Older People during the COVID-19 Pandemic

Legitimate Expectation and Social Security Law Under the European Convention of Human Rights

The right to minimum subsistence and property protection under the ECHR: Never the twain shall meet?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About