Case Law 52562/99 ; 52620/99 (11/01/2006)
Authority: European Authorities: European Court of human rights
Subject: The European Court of Human Rights has established the positive and negative meaning of the right to freedom of association, thus giving a true interpretation of art. 11 of the Convention.
The case dealt with the opposition, by the applicants, to those contractual clauses (closed shop agreements) which provide for a kind of " mandatory joining and permanence" to unions or guilds, allowing employers to recruit only those workers who have joined and continue to take part in them. Therefore the clause imposed a compulsory enrollment in order to be able to access a specific job/profession. The Court has observed that neither a compulsory enrollment, nor the denial of free withdrawal can be imposed, since these two cases would go against the freedom of association according to art. 11 of the Convention.
Parties: Sorensen and Rasmussen v. Denmark
Original language: English
Classification: Art. 12 Freedom of assembly - Freedom of association - Art. 53 Level of protection
Notices: Effectiveness of the Charter
To sustain its decision, the European Court of Human Rights expressly refers to articles 12 and 53 of the Charter of Nice.