Search the Commonwealth and International Human Rights Case Law Databases
The two Case Law Databases contain over 2,800 summaries of significant human rights decisions from both domestic Commonwealth courts and from courts and tribunals applying international human rights law such as the African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights and the European Court of Human Rights. The search results will list all the summaries in which your search term(s) appear, with the most relevant summary appearing first.
Call for cases: INTERIGHTS is always seeking to increase its coverage of human rights-related case law from national courts in Commonwealth and common law jurisdictions. In particular, we are interested in accessing more cases from 19 specific jurisdictions (click here for details). If you regularly deal with relevant cases in these countries or have access to the judgments, we would be happy to offer you a free subscription to one of our publications in return for regular supply of this information. Please contact us for more details.
Acknowledgments: Thanks to Allen & Overy, the Commonwealth Secretariat, the Honourable Society of the Inner Temple, the International Bar Association, the Law Society of England & Wales, the Law Society of Ireland, the John D and Catherine T MacArthur Foundation, and the University of Oxford for their support of the Commonwealth Human Rights Case Law Database. Thanks also to all those who have contributed judgments.
INTERIGHTS also produces two hard-copy publications containing summaries of human rights decisions. The Commonwealth Human Rights Law Digest is dedicated to reporting human rights and constitutional law cases from across Commonwealth and common law jurisdictions, and key international human rights judgments feature in the INTERIGHTS Bulletin. Details of all INTERIGHTS publications can be found here.
Please contact us if you have any enquiries related to this service.
Disclaimer: Whilst INTERIGHTS has taken every care to ensure that the information contained in the Databases are correct, they are a tool for identifying relevant cases, and summaries are intended only to indicate the content of the judgment. It cannot guarantee the accuracy of information contained within the Databases and users should always check the full text of any decision before relying on a summary.