A magyar jogban a halottakon végezhető, de nem temetési beavatkozásokról csak az egészségügyi jog szól, így egyéb tudományos célú vizsgálatok sem lennének elvileg lehetségesek. Ebben kizárólag a nemzetközi múzeumi etikai kódex érvényesül. Sok kultúra ezt halottgyalázásnak tekinti. A halottgyalázás kriminális formáin túl az orvosi eljárás (kutatás és gyakorlás) is alkalmas lehet arra, hogy a holttest méltóságának sérelmét jelentse. Ennek ellensúlyozása, hogy a post mortem beavatkozásokhoz az érintett vagy hozzátartozói beleegyezése szükséges. A dolgozat a magyar szabályozást mutatja be, amelyben a halottat betegnek tekintjük, a holttest vonatkozásában a betegjogok speciális érvényesülése történik. A jog a boncolást illetően számos jogot ad a hozzátartozónak, és az anatómiai oktatást is szabályozza. A szervnyerés során az opting-out elvét érvényesíti, tiltakozást csak a betegtől fogad el. Szigorúan védi az elhunyt egészségügyi adatait, de nem korlátozza a hozzátartozók érdekérvényesítését. A képzés és továbbképzés csekély figyelmet fordít ezekre a kérdésekre, a szabályozás pedig nem felel meg a jelenkor elvárásainak és lehetőségeinek, ezért célszerű lenne újragondolni a probléma teljes spektrumát. Orv. Hetil., 2012, 153, 330–338.
The European Convention on Human Rights is a milestone in the development of international law, aimed at guarding fundamental freedoms and human rights in Europe. As a consequence of the unique path of Central and Eastern European legal development, the provisions of the Convention and the case law of the European Court of Human Rights were not necessarily implemented into Hungarian law through the jurisprudence of Hungarian courts, but it was much rather the Constitutional Court who facilitated such implementation. Although the human rights protection system shaped by the European Court of Human Rights has now become an integral part of Hungarian law, the effect of the Convention and the Strasbourg case law on the Hungarian legal development is still rather meagre. The present article seeks to explore the possible reasons for this development.
of Hungarianlaw. Given that Bosnia-Herzegovina did not become a part of the Kingdom of Hungary, it was not necessary. The necessity for state level regulation of Islam arose through a contradiction. In the part of the country that belonged to the
In the past decades due to changed technical advances, features of the personality have become economically exploitable to an extent not previously known. Pop stars, TV celebrities as well as famous athletes have sought protection against the commercial use of their images, names and likenesses without their consent.1 Despite the economic value of personality and image rights, there is currently no international standard or agreed legal concept for recognising an image right. While many jurisdictions, for example, the US, Germany, France and Hungary offer express statutory protection against the unauthorised commercial use of an individual’s image by a third party in the context of publicity or personality rights, English law provides no cause of action for the infringement of image rights as such. Although a celebrity may currently obtain protection through various statutory and common law rights, such as the developing law of privacy, trade mark law breach of confidence and, in particular, the tort of passing off, none of these rights were designed to protect image or personality rights.2 In this context, this article explores the potentially enforceable rights, their benefits and practical strategies to protect name and image rights in the UK3 and Hungary.
This study aims at delineating the Hungarian rules on lis pendens and res judicata in the Code of Civil Procedure Bill when they become available in September 2016. Both institutions serve the goal to prevent inconsistent judgements in a case and therefore to establish legal certainty, nevertheless certain exceptions are regulated. Res judicata and lis pendens are formal barriers to re-litigation, the judge takes them into account ex officio. Under the present and future rules there is a rather wide opportunity to deteriorate finality with legal recourses available against final judgments.
This paper discusses the different models of appointment applied for constitutional judges in Europe, taking into consideration also the appointment procedure of the two European regional courts. It offers an account and a comparative analysis of the three appointment models: the split, the collaborative and the parliamentary model, discussing their practical application and shortcomings. In particular, the paper deals with the question of how to avoid standstills in the different appointment procedures and with the publicity of these procedures. The author concludes with a proposal for the Hungarian Constitutional Court, arguing that the split model is the one that ensures better that the composition of the Court expresses a balance between the branches of government.
The essay attempts to give an overview on the cases relating to Hungary before European Court of Justice in the period between 2004–2007, which are classified into four categories. The first part of the article analyses eleven procedures concerning petitions for preliminary rulings, illustrating the bearings of the cases and pointing out the importance as well as consequences from the point of view of the Hungarian legal order. The essay refers to the fact that activity of Hungarian courts to apply preliminary ruling procedures is exceptionally high comparing with the other nine Member States acceded to EU in 2004 and in almost each cases concerned, the references were profoundly considered by the Hungarian court. The second category described in this paper includes cases, in which Hungarian individual persons participate as litigants (including the cases before Civil Service Tribunal). The experiences of these procedures on the basis of direct complaints indicate the conclusion that in several cases, the attorneys representing the plaintiff before ECJ involve not enough responsibilities to avoid bringing obviously inadmissible actions. In the third part of the paper the reader can get an insight into the cases in which the Republic of Hungary appears as litigant. Finally the fourth category embraces cases with indirect interest relating Hungary. These are referred but not deeply examined in the article.