Court judgments
Famous court judgments told as stories: what happened to a person, what question the court faced, what it decided and what the judgment does not mean. Each film rests on the text of the judgment itself. The films need no legal training: each case shows how a general rule is applied to a specific situation and which arguments a court weighs before deciding.
- 1The right to be forgotten
- 2Your phone knows where you were
- 3A judge against the state
- 4Beer and equality
The right to be forgotten
Court of Justice of the European Union, Google Spain, 2014
People most often check a person’s name in a search engine: before a job interview, a deal or a first meeting. The search shows everything ever published about them, including old unpleasant stories that are long over. In 2014 the Court of Justice of the European Union decided whether a person can demand that such a link be removed from the results. The case shows what exactly can be removed and whom to ask.
Film. People most often check a person’s name in a search engine: before a job interview, a deal or a first meeting. The search shows everything ever published about them, including old unpleasant stories that are long over. In 2014 the Court of Justice of the European Union decided whether a person can demand that such a link be removed from the results. The case shows what exactly can be removed and whom to ask.
Your phone knows where you were
US Supreme Court, Carpenter v. United States, 2018
To stay connected, a cell phone keeps connecting to the nearest of its carrier’s towers, and the carrier records which tower and when. Over a few months these records add up to a detailed history of where a person has been. In Carpenter v. United States the US Supreme Court decided whether investigators can obtain that history from the carrier without a warrant. The answer shapes how well the data companies keep about us is protected.
Film. To stay connected, a cell phone keeps connecting to the nearest of its carrier’s towers, and the carrier records which tower and when. Over a few months these records add up to a detailed history of where a person has been. In Carpenter v. United States the US Supreme Court decided whether investigators can obtain that history from the carrier without a warrant. The answer shapes how well the data companies keep about us is protected.
A judge against the state
European Court of Human Rights, Oleksandr Volkov v. Ukraine, 2013
A person in a dispute with a state body counts on the dispute being decided by a judge who is independent of both sides. In Oleksandr Volkov v. Ukraine that was missing when the state dismissed a judge himself. The European Court of Human Rights delivered its judgment in the case on January 9, 2013. The case shows the signs by which courts check whether a hearing was independent and impartial.
Film. A person in a dispute with a state body counts on the dispute being decided by a judge who is independent of both sides. In Oleksandr Volkov v. Ukraine that was missing when the state dismissed a judge himself. The European Court of Human Rights delivered its judgment in the case on January 9, 2013. The case shows the signs by which courts check whether a hearing was independent and impartial.
Beer and equality
US Supreme Court, Craig v. Boren, 1976
The law constantly sorts people into groups: by age, by income, by place of residence. Sometimes it sorts them by sex, and then the question is how weighty a reason the state must give for doing so. The US Supreme Court answered it in 1976 in a case about low-alcohol beer in Oklahoma. The case shows how a court tests a rule that treats men and women differently.
Film. The law constantly sorts people into groups: by age, by income, by place of residence. Sometimes it sorts them by sex, and then the question is how weighty a reason the state must give for doing so. The US Supreme Court answered it in 1976 in a case about low-alcohol beer in Oklahoma. The case shows how a court tests a rule that treats men and women differently.
Sources
- Judgment of the Court of Justice (Grand Chamber) of May 13, 2014, Case C-131/12, Google Spain SL, Google Inc. v AEPD, Mario Costeja GonzálezThe right to be forgotten
- Opinion of Advocate General N. Jääskinen of June 25, 2013 in Case C-131/12The right to be forgotten
- Judgment of the Court of Justice (Grand Chamber) of September 24, 2019, Case C-507/17, Google LLC v CNILThe right to be forgotten
- Regulation (EU) 2016/679, Article 17 - official textThe right to be forgotten
- Carpenter v. United States, No. 16-402, slip opinion (primary source)Your phone knows where you were
- Docket No. 16-402 on the US Supreme Court website (dates, parties, outcome)Your phone knows where you were
- Text of the Fourth Amendment, US National ArchivesYour phone knows where you were
- Judgment of the European Court of Human Rights of January 9, 2013, Oleksandr Volkov v. Ukraine, application no. 21722/11A judge against the state
- Official Ukrainian translation of the judgment on the Verkhovna Rada website (in Ukrainian)A judge against the state
- Resolution of the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine of June 17, 2010, No. 2352-VI “On the dismissal of judges” (in Ukrainian)A judge against the state
- Resolution of the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine of December 25, 2014, No. 60-VIII (in Ukrainian)A judge against the state
- Law of Ukraine of June 2, 2016, No. 1401-VIII “On amending the Constitution of Ukraine (regarding justice)” (in Ukrainian)A judge against the state
- Craig v. Boren, 429 U.S. 190 (1976), United States Reports, vol. 429, Library of CongressBeer and equality
- Clark v. Jeter, 486 U.S. 456 (1988), United States Reports, vol. 486, p. 461Beer and equality
- United States v. Virginia, 518 U.S. 515 (1996), United States Reports, vol. 518, pp. 524, 532-534Beer and equality
- US Constitution, Fourteenth Amendment, Section 1, Constitution Annotated (Library of Congress)Beer and equality