Opinión Consultiva OC-22/16 de la Corte Interamericana de Derechos Humanos del 26-02-2016

CourtInter-American Court of Human Rights
Date26 February 2016
Respondent StatePanamá
Case TypeOpinión consultiva
PublicationSerie A No. 22.

Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI

Get Started for Free

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform

  • Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions

  • Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms

  • Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

vLex

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform

  • Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions

  • Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms

  • Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

vLex

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform

  • Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions

  • Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms

  • Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

vLex

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform

  • Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions

  • Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms

  • Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

vLex

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform

  • Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions

  • Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms

  • Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

vLex

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform

  • Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions

  • Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms

  • Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

vLex
64 cases
  • Report IACHR. Case No. 12.256, 12.258 y 12.307 (Venezuela)
    • International Law
    • Inter-American Comission of Human Rights
    • Invalid date
    ...Sramek vs. Austria. Serie A, Nº 84; Campbell and Fell vs. United Kingdom. Serie A, Nº 39; Ringeinsen vs. Austria. Serie A, Nº 13; E.v.N.. Serie A, Nº 22; y S. vs. S.. Serie A, Nº 78. 135 Así, por ejemplo, en el Caso Piersack v. Belgium. Sentencia del 1º de octubre de 1982. Serie A, Nº 53. 2......
  • Report IACHR. Case No. 11.699 (Venezuela)
    • International Law
    • Inter-American Comission of Human Rights
    • Invalid date
    ...Case of Campbell and Fell v. United Kingdom, Series A, No. 39; ECHR, C. of Ringeinsen v. Austria, Series A, No. 13; ECHR, C.o.E.v....N., Series A, No. 22; ECHR, C.o.S.v.S., Series A, No. 78. 210 Véase, C..o..R., Le C ompte, V..L. and De Meyre, todos citados por VAN DIJK/VAN HOOF, THEORY AND......
  • Report IACHR. Case No. 12.489 (Venezuela)
    • International Law
    • Inter-American Comission of Human Rights
    • Invalid date
    ...Sramek vs. Austria, Serie A, Nº 84; Campbell and Fell vs. United Kingdom, Serie A, N 39; Ringeinsen vs. Austria, Serie A, Nº 13; E.v.N., Serie A, Nº 22; y Schiesser vs. Switzerland, Serie A, Nº 78. 123 Así, por ejemplo, en el Caso Piersak, Sentencia del 1º de octubre de 1982, Serie A, Nº 5.......
  • Report No. 196 (2021) IACHR. Petition No. 466-13 (Guatemala)
    • International Law
    • Inter-American Comission of Human Rights
    • 1 January 2021
    ...esta decisión e incluirla en su Informe Anual a la Asamblea General de la Organización de los Estados Americanos. 6 Corte I.D.H. Opinión Consultiva OC-22/16 de 26 de febrero de 2016. Titularidad de derechos de las personas jurídicas en el sistema interamericano de derechos humanos (interpre......
  • Get Started for Free
5 books & journal articles