Theorizing an enhancement of the protection and of the justiciability of biorights in the European Union
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.12795/IETSCIENTIA.2021.i01.13Palabras clave:
Tribunal de Justicia de la Unión Europea, Tribunal Europeo de Derechos Humanos, Bioderechos, Investigación con embriones humanos, Maternidad subrogada, Fertilización cruzada jurisprudencialResumen
A lo largo de las décadas, la Unión Europea ha dedicado una creciente atención a la bioética y al bioderecho a partir de la adopción de la Directiva 65/65/CEE sobre las especialidades farmacéuticas. A partir del análisis de los Tratados UE y de sus disposiciones capaces de justificar la incorporación de un enfoque bioético y biojurídico, y buscando un equilibrio entre los principios e intereses contrapuestos, el presente estudio aborda la jurisprudencia del Tribunal de Justicia de la Unión Europea y el papel desempeñado por la Carta de los Derechos Fundamentales de la Unión Europea (CDFUE). Mediante la comparación con la jurisprudencia del Tribunal Europeo de Derechos Humanos, se pretende elaborar unas soluciones viables basadas en los derechos humanos para enfrentar los desafíos que plantean la bioética y el bioderecho, haciendo hincapié en la técnica de la fertilización cruzada jurisprudencial y de conformidad con el Artículo 52(3) de la CDFUE.
Descargas
Citas
Andorno, R. (2002). Biomedicine and international human rights law: in search of a global consensus, Bulletin of the World Health Organization, 80, 959-963. https://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/handle/10665/268678/PMC2567695.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y.
Arango Olaya, M. (2014). Inter American Court of Human Rights provisional measures adopted in B. v. El Salvador case and the strengthening of reproduction rights in the Inter-American system. Anuario de Derechos Humanos, n° 10, 177-185.
Aparisi Miralles, Á. (2013). El principio de la dignidad humana como fundamento de un bioderecho global. Cuadernos de Bioética, XXIV 2013/2ª.
Baeten, R. (2014). Cross-border patient mobility in the European Union: in search of benefits from the new legal framework. Journal of Health Services Research & Policy, 19(4), 195–197.
Bonadio, E. y Rovati, A. M. (2015). The Court of Justice of the European Union Clarifies when Human Embryonic Stem Cells Can Be Patented. European Journal of Risk Regulation, 6(2), 293-295.
Brown, H. (2015). World’s first genetically modified human embryo raises ethical concerns. The Conversation, 27 April 2015. Recuperado el 8 de Abril de 2021, de https://theconversation.com/worlds-first-genetically-modified-human-embryo-raises-ethical-concerns-40766
Butti, E. (2013). The Roles and Relationship between the Two European Courts in Post-Lisbon EU Human Rights Protection. JURIST – Legal news and research. Recuperado el 8 de Abril de 2021, de https://www.jurist.org/commentary/2013/09/elena-butti-lisbon-treaty/
Castro, R. (2016). Mitochondrial replacement therapy: the UK and US regulatory landscapes. Journal of Law Bioscience, 3(3), 726–735. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5570689/
Chia, E. A. y Contreras, P. (2014). Análisis de la Sentencia Artavia Murillo y Otros (“Fecundación In Vitro”) vs. Costa Rica de la Corte Interamericana de Derechos Humanos. Estudios Constitucionales, 12(1), Centro de Estudios Constitucionales de Chile Universidad de Talca, 567-585.
Connor, S. (2017). First Human Embryos Edited in U.S., Researchers have demonstrated they can efficiently improve the DNA of human embryos, MIT Technology Review. https://www.technologyreview.com/s/608350/first-human-embryos-edited-in-us/
Council of Europe (1991). Report of the European Commission of Human Rights, of 7 March 1991, Appl. No. 14234/88 and 14235/88. globalhealthrights.org. http://www.globalhealthrights.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/EComHR-1991-Open-Door-and-Dublin-Well-Women-v.-Ireland.pdf
Council of Europe, European Court of Human Rights (2015). Health-related issues in the case law of the European Court of Human Rights, Thematic Report, p. 5.
Cyranoski, D. y Reardon, S. (2005). Chinese scientists genetically modify human embryos. Rumours of germline modification prove true — and look set to reignite an ethical debate, Nature. Recuperado el 8 de Abril de 2021, de https://www.nature.com/news/chinese-scientists-genetically-modify-human-embryos-1.17378
Cyranoski, D. (2017). Chinese scientists fix genetic disorder in cloned human embryos. A method for precisely editing genes in human embryos hints at a cure for a blood disease, Nature. Recuperado el 8 de Abril de 2021, de https://www.nature.com/news/chinese-scientists-fix-genetic-disorder-in-cloned-human-embryos-1.22694
Daniels, M. (2004). Impact of the Clinical Trials Directive on the Research-Based Pharmaceutical Industry. International Journal of Pharmaceutical Medicine, 18, 5–8.
Dannreuther, A. (2014). The CJEU clarifies when stem cells can be patented in Europe. EU Law Analysis. Recuperado el 8 de Abril de 2021, de http://eulawanalysis.blogspot.com/2014/12/the-cjeu-clarifies-when-stem-cells-can.html
De Miguel Beriain, I. (2008). La clonación ¿sueño o quimera? Un análisis ético-jurídico de la transferencia de núcleos celulares. En R. Junquera De Estéfani (Ed.), Bioética y bioderecho. Reflexiones jurídicas ante los retos bioéticos (pp. 228 ff.). Comares.
Di Salvo, D. (2014). The Era of Genetically-Altered Humans Could Begin This Year. Forbes. Recuperado el 8 de Abril de 2021, de https://www.geneticsandsociety.org/article/era-genetically-altered-humans-could-begin-year
Di Stefano, A. (2012). Bio-ethics under Human Rights Scrutiny: Toward a Right to Pre-implantation Genetic Testing under the ECHR?. Strasbourg Observers. Recuperado el 8 de Abril de 2021, de https://strasbourgobservers.com/category/cases/costa-and-pavan-v-italy/
Di Stefano, A. (2013). Tutela del corpo femminile e diritti riproduttivi: biopotere e biodiritto nella vicenda italiana in tema di diagnosi preimpianto. Osservatorio di Diritti Umani, La Comunità Internazionale, 4, 2013, 745-772.
Donnelly, J. (1984). Cultural Relativism and Universal Human Rights. Human Rights Quarterly, 6(4), 400-419.
Durand, M. (2011). La dignité de la personne humaine en droit de l’Union européenne. De la genèse aux fonctions du concept. [Thèse pour l’obtention du grade de Docteur en Droit, Université Paris Ouest Nanterre La Defense, Ecole doctorale de sciences juridiques et politiques, Universität Des Saarlandes, Rechts-und Wirtschaftswissenschaftlichen Fakultät des Saarlandes, Mention droit public]. https://www.worldcat.org/title/dignite-de-la-personne-humaine-en-droit-de-lunion-europeenne-de-la-genese-aux-fonctions-du-concept/oclc/800847877
European Commission. Protection of biotechnological inventions. European Commission. https://ec.europa.eu/growth/industry/policy/intellectual-property/patents/biotechnological-inventions_en
European Parliament (2014). Resolution about the Annual Report on human rights and democracy in the world. European Parliament. https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/TA-8-2015-0470_EN.pdf
European Parliament (2015). Resolution, of 17 December 2015, on the Annual Report on Human Rights and Democracy in the World 2014 and the European Union’s policy on the matter. European Parliament. https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/TA-8-2015-0470_EN.html
European Parliament (2016). Regulating international surrogacy arrangements. State of Play, of 30 August 2016. europa.eu. https://www.europarl.europa.eu/thinktank/en/document.html?reference=IPOL_BRI(2016)571368
Fact Sheets on the European Union (2020). The protection of fundamental rights in the EU. European Parliament. https://www.europarl.europa.eu/factsheets/en/sheet/146/the-protection-of-fundamental-rights-in-the-eu
Fafce (2017). European Parliament Rejects a Proposal for a Report on Surrogacy. Fafce. Recuperado el 8 de Abril de 2021, de http://fafce.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=402:european-parliament-rejects-a-proposal-for-a-report-on-surrogacy&catid=53:human-dignity&lang=en&Itemid=195
Finck, M. (2014). Case Comment: CD v ST and Z v A Government Department & Ors (C-167/12 and C-363/12). eutopia law. Recuperado el 8 de Abril de 2021, de https://eutopialaw.com/2014/03/21/case-comment-cd-v-st-and-z-v-a-government-department-ors-c-16712-and-c-36312/
Fleig-Goldstein, R. M. (2017). The Russian Constitutional Court versus the European Court of Human Rights: How the Strasbourg Court Should Respond to Russia’s Refusal to Execute ECtHR Judgments. Columbia Journal of Transnational Law, 56(1), 172-218.
Frewer, L. J., Coles, D., Van Der Lans, I. A., Schroeder, D., Champion, K. y Apperley, J. F. (2011). Impact of the European Clinical Trials Directive on prospective academic clinical trials associated with BMT. Bone Marrow Transplant, 46(3), 443–447.
García San José, D. I. (2012). Derecho de la Unión, Investigación embrionaria humana y patentes biológicas. Revista de Derecho Comunitario Europeo, 41,161-180.
García San José, D. I. (2017). Epigenética y gestación por sustitución: más razones a favor de una regulación internacional para un negocio global - Epigenetics and Commercial Surrogacy: More Reasons For International Law Regulting this Global Business. Anuario Mexicano de Derecho Internacional, 17, 329-368.
García San José, D. I. (2013). European Normative Framework for Biomedical Research in Human Embryos. Editorial Aranzadi.
García San José, D.I. (2010). International Bio Law. An International Overview of Developments in Human Embryo Research and Experimentation. Laborum.
García San José , D. I. (2012). Investigación embrionaria y patentes biotecnológicas. La necesidad de contar con un corpus iuris gentium europaeum. En D. I. García San José (Ed.), Marco Jurídico Europeo relativo a la Investigación Biomédica en Transferencia Nuclear y Reprogramación Celular (pp. 285-301). Thomson Reuters Aranzadi.
García San José, D. (2018). La Europa de los derechos ante los avances científicos y tecnológicos. Tirant lo Blanc.
Gerards, J. (2019). General Principles of the European Convention on Human Rights. Cambridge University Press.
Gerber, P. y O’Byrne, K. (2015). Surrogacy, Law and Human Rights. Routledge.
Gómez-Salvago Sánchez, C. (2012). Patentes de ADN: entre la ética y la utilidad. En D. I. García San José (Ed.), Marco Jurídico Europeo relativo a la Investigación Biomédica en Transferencia Nuclear y Reprogramación Celular (pp. 261-283). Thomson Reuters Aranzadi.
Hartmann, M. (2012). Impact assessment of the European Clinical Trials Directive: a longitudinal, prospective, observational study analyzing patterns and trends in clinical drug trial applications submitted since 2001 to regulatory agencies in six EU countries. Trials, 13.
Hemminki, A. (Group Leader) (2006). Harmful impact of EU clinical trials directive. Academic clinical research in cancer seems to have no future in Europe. BMJ, 332(7540), 501–502.
Herrera Flores, J. (2005). Los derechos humanos como productos culturales: Crítica del humanismo abstracto. Catarata.
Hoffman, D. I. Zellman G. L., Fair C. C., Mayer J. F., Zeitz J. G, Gibbons W. E. y Turner T. G. Jr. (2003). Cryopreserved embryos in the United States and their availability for research. Fertility and Sterility, 79(5), 1063-1069.
Hoofnagle, C. J., Van Der Sloot, B. y Zuiderveen Borgesius, F. (2019). The European Union general data protection regulation: what it is and what it means. Information & Communications Technology Law, 28(1).
Hrafn, Á. y Salvör, N. (2015). Reproductive Technology and Surrogacy: A Global Perspective. Nordic Council of Ministers.
Ienca, M. y Andorno, R. (2017). Towards new human rights in the age of neuroscience and neurotechnology. Life Sciences, Society and Policy, 13(5), 1-27.
Kuo, L. (2018). China orders inquiry into ‘world’s first gene-edited babies. The Guardian. Recuperado el 8 de Abril de 2021, de https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/nov/27/china-orders-inquiry-into-worlds-first-gene-edited-babies
Lanphier, E. Urnov, F., Haecker, S. E., Werner, M. y Smolenski, J. (2015). Don’t Edit the Human Germ Line. Nature News. Recuperado el 8 de Abril de 2021, de http://www.nature.com/news/don-t-edit-the-human-germ-line-1.17111
Legg., A. (2012). The Margin of Appreciation in International Human Rights Law: Deference and Proportionality. Oxford University Press.
Letsas, G. (2010). The ECHR as a living instrument: Its meaning and legitimacy. En A. Føllesdal, B. Peters, G. Ulfstein (Eds.), Constituting Europe: The European Court of Human Rights in a National, European and Global Context (pp. 106-141). Cambridge University Press.
Mayo Clinic (2019). Stem cells: What they are and what they do. mayoclinic.org. Recuperado el 8 de Abril de 2021, de https://www.mayoclinic.org/tests-procedures/bone-marrow-transplant/in-depth/stem-cells/art-20048117.
McDonald, H. y Graham-Harrison, E. (2018). Ireland votes by landslide to legalise abortion. The Guardian. Recuperado el 8 de Abril de 2021, de https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/may/26/ireland-votes-by-landslide-to-legalise-abortion
Nickel, J. y Reidy, D. (2007). Relativism, Self-Determination, and Human Rights. En D. K. Chatterjee (Ed.), Democracy in a Global World: Human Rights and Political Participation in the 21st Century. Rowman & Littlefield Publishers. Recuperado el 8 de Abril de 2021, de http://web.utk.edu/~dreidy/nickelreidyfi-naldraft2005.pdf
Nicola, F. y Davies, B. (2017). Eu Law Stories. Cambridge University Press.
Nuevo López, P. (2012). Dignidad humana y patentabilidad de invenciones biomédicas. Estudios de Deusto, 60(1), 327-355. https://doi.org/10.18543/ed-60(1)-2012pp327-355
Oberman, M. (2018). Her Body, Our Laws: On the Front Lines of the Abortion War, from El Salvador to Oklahoma. Beacon Press.
Orcut, M. (2016). The Unintended Consequence of Congress’s Ban on Designer Babies. The testing of new therapies to prevent a debilitating mitochondrial genetic disease in babies has hit a dead end. MIT Technology Review. https://www.technologyreview.com/s/602219/the-unintended-consequence-of-congresss-ban-on-designer-babies/
Peers, S. (2014). Surrogate Mothers’ Day in the Court of Justice: Reflections on EU sex equality law. EU Law Analysis. Recuperado el 8 de Abril de 2021, de http://eulawanalysis.blogspot.com/2014/03/surrogate-mothers-day-in-court-of.html
Penasa, S. (2015). La Corte di giustizia e la ri-definizione del contenuto normativo di “embrione umano”: l’ultima (?) fase della “saga” Brüstle”. Forum di Quaderni costituzionali, 1. http://www.forumcostituzionale.it/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2015/01/penasa.pdf
Penasa, S. (2013). Opening the Pandora box: La Corte di giustizia nuovamente di fronte alla definizione di ‘embrione umano. Quaderni Costituzionali, 3, 653-655. https://www.forumcostituzionale.it/wordpress/images/stories/pdf/documenti_forum/euroscopio/note_europa/0013_penasa.pdf
Penasa, S. (2012). The Italian Law on assisted reproductive technologies N. 40 of 2004, facing the European Court of Human Rights: the case of Costa and Pavan v. Italy. Revista de Derecho y Genoma Humano/Law and the Human Genome Review, 37, 155-178. https://www.biodiritto.org/Pubblicazioni/Gruppo-BioDiritto/The-Italian-Law-on-assisted-reproductive-technologies-n.-40-of-2004-facing-the-European-Court-of-Human-Rights-the-case-of-Costa-and-Pavan-v.-Italy
Plomer, A., Taymor, K.S. y Scott, C. T. (2008). Challenges to Human Embryonic Stem Cell Patents. Stem Cell Stem, 2(1), 13-17. Recuperado el 8 de Abril de 2021, de http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1934590907003220
Poli, L. (2017). La Grande Camera e l’ultima parola sul caso Paradiso e Campanelli. SIDI Blog – il Blog della Società Italiana di Diritto Internazionale e dell’Unione Europea. Recuperado el 8 de Abril de 2021, de http://www.sidiblog.org/2017/02/21/la-grande-camera-e-lultima-parola-sul-caso-paradiso-e-campanelli/.
Poli, L. (2015). La Sentenza Parrillo c. Italia e quello che la Corte (non) dice sullo status dell’embrione. SIDIBlog – Il Blog della Società Italiana di Diritto Internazionale e dell’Unione Europea. Recuperado el 8 de Abril de 2021, de http://www.sidiblog.org/2015/09/22/la-sentenza-parrillo-c-italia-e-quello-che-la-corte-non-dice-sullo-status-dellembrione/.
Redi, C.A. (2011). La questione delle cellule staminali. Il quadro scientifico. En S. Canestrari, G. Ferrando, C. M. Mazzoni, S. Rodotà (Eds.), Trattato di Biodiritto. Il Governo del Corpo Tomo I (pp. 1087 ss.). Giuffré Editore.
Rigby, B. (2014). EPO Appeal Board implements stem cell ruling of CJEU. Dehns. Recuperado el 8 de Abril de 2021, de https://www.dehns.com/site/information/industry_news_and_articles/epo_appeal_board_implements_stem_cell_ruling_of_cjeu.html.
Rodotà, S. (2012). Il diritto di avere diritti. Laterza Editore.
Rogers, K. (2008). Participatory Democracy, Science and Technology - An Exploration in the Philosophy of Science. Palgrave McMillan.
Ruiz Miguel, A. (2014). Derecho a la Vida y Constitución: Consecuencias de la Sentencia de la Corte Interamericana de Derechos Humanos “Artavia Murillo v. Costa Rica”. Estudios Constitucionales, Año 12, 1, 71-104.
Ruiz De La Cuesta, A. (2012). El debate doctrinal sobre el principio de protección de la vida humana, una lectura crítica desde la concepción gradualista o progresiva. En D. I. Garcia San José (Ed.), Marco Jurídico Europeo relativo a la Investigación Biomédica en Transferencia Nuclear y Reprogramación Celular (pp. 23-39). Thomson Reuters Aranzadi.
Spaak, T. (2007). Moral Relativism and Human Rights. Buffalo Human Rights Law Review, 13, 73-85.
Staff and Agencies (2018). World’s first gene-edited babies created in China, claims scientist. The Guardian. Recuperado el 8 de Abril de 2021, de https://www.theguardian.com/science/2018/nov/26/worlds-first-gene-edited-babies-created-in-china-claims-scientist
StatBite (2010). Key findings from the “Impact on clinical research of European legislation” report”. Journal of National Cancer Institute, 102(5), 293 ss.
Storey, T. y Turner, C. (2014). Unlocking EU Law. Routledge.
The Economist (2021). Russia’s liberal surrogacy rules are under threat. theeconomist.com. Recuperado el 8 de Abril de 2021, de https://www.economist.com/europe/2021/03/18/russias-liberal-surrogacy-rules-are-under-threat
Timmer, A. (2011). S.H. and Others v Austria: margin of appreciation and IVF. Strasbourg Observers. Recuperado el 8 de Abril de 2021, de https://strasbourgobservers.com/category/cases/s-h-and-others-v-austria/
Toner, J. P., Coddington, C. C., Doody, K., Van Voorhis, B., Seifer, D. B., Ball, G. D., Luke, B. y Wantman, E. (2016). Society for Assisted Reproductive Technology and assisted reproductive technology in the United States: a 2016 update. Fertility and Sterility, 106 (3), 541-546.
Van Der Sloot, B. y Zuiderveen Borgesius, F. The EU General Data Protection Regulation: a new global standard for information privacy, Working Draft. Recuperado el 8 de Abril de 2021, de https://bartvandersloot.com/onewebmedia/SSRN-id3162987.pdf
Wright, M. J. (2015). Maternity Rights Law. Lulu.
Normative references /Referencias normativas;
Commission Directive 2006/17/EC, of 8 February 2006, implementing Directive 2004/23/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council as regards certain technical requirements for the donation, procurement and testing of human tissues and cells (Text with EEA relevance). OJ L 330M , 28 November 2006, pp. 162–174 (MT), OJ L 38, 9 February 2006, pp. 40–52 (ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, IT, LV, LT, HU, NL, PL, PT, SK, SL, FI, SV), Special edition in Croatian: Chapter 15 Volume 026 pp. 78 – 90. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A32006L0017
Commission Directive 2006/86/EC, of 24 October 2006, implementing Directive 2004/23/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council as regards traceability requirements, notification of serious adverse reactions and events and certain technical requirements for the coding, processing, preservation, storage and distribution of human tissues and cells (Text with EEA relevance). OJ L 294, 25 October 2006, pp. 32–50 (ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, IT, LV, LT, HU, NL, PL, PT, SK, SL, FI, SV), OJ L 314M , 1 December 2007, pp. 272–290 (MT), Special edition in Bulgarian: Chapter 15 Volume 017 pp. 150 – 168, Special edition in Romanian: Chapter 15 Volume 017 pp. 150 – 168, Special edition in Croatian: Chapter 15 Volume 015 pp. 31 – 49. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A32006L0086
Council Directive 65/65/EEC, of 26 January 1965, on the approximation of provisions laid down by Law, Regulation or Administrative Action relating to proprietary medicinal products. OJ 22, 9 February 1965, pp. 369–373. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A31965L0065
Council Directive 2000/78/EC, of 27 November 2000, establishing a general framework for equal treatment in employment and occupation. OJ L 303, 2 December 2000, pp. 16–22 (ES, DA, DE, EL, EN, FR, IT, NL, PT, FI, SV), Special edition in Czech: Chapter 05 Volume 004 pp. 79 – 85, Special edition in Estonian: Chapter 05 Volume 004 pp. 79 – 85, Special edition in Latvian: Chapter 05 Volume 004 pp. 79 – 85, Special edition in Lithuanian: Chapter 05 Volume 004 pp. 79 – 85, Special edition in Hungarian Chapter 05 Volume 004 pp. 79 – 85, Special edition in Maltese: Chapter 05 Volume 004 pp. 79 – 85, Special edition in Polish: Chapter 05 Volume 004 pp. 79 – 85, Special edition in Slovak: Chapter 05 Volume 004 pp. 79 – 85, Special edition in Slovene: Chapter 05 Volume 004 pp. 79 – 85, Special edition in Bulgarian: Chapter 05 Volume 006 pp. 7 – 13, Special edition in Romanian: Chapter 05 Volume 006 pp. 7 – 13, Special edition in Croatian: Chapter 05 Volume 001 pp. 69 – 75. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=celex%3A32000L0078
Council framework Decision 2008/977/JHA, of 27 November 2008, on the protection of personal data processed in the framework of police and judicial cooperation in criminal matters. OJ L 350, 30 December 2008, pp. 60–71. https://edps.europa.eu/data-protection/our-work/publications/legislation/council-framework-decision-2008977jha_en
Council of Europe, Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and of the Human Being with regard to the Application of Biology and Medicine (Convention on Human Rights and Biomedicine or the ‘Oviedo Convention’), April 4, 1997 (entered into force on December 1, 1999), CETS n. 164, Article 5.
Council of Europe, European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, as amended by Protocols Nos. 11 and 14, November 4, 1950, ETS 5. https://www.echr.coe.int/documents/convention_eng.pdf
Directive 95/46/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council, of 24 October 1995, on the protection of individuals with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data. OJ L 281, 23 November 1995, pp, 31–50 (ES, DA, DE, EL, EN, FR, IT, NL, PT, FI, SV), Special edition in Czech: Chapter 13 Volume 015 pp. 355 – 374, Special edition in Estonian: Chapter 13 Volume 015 pp. 355 – 374, Special edition in Latvian: Chapter 13 Volume 015 pp. 355 – 374, Special edition in Lithuanian: Chapter 13 Volume 015 pp. 355 – 374, Special edition in Hungarian Chapter 13 Volume 015 pp. 355 – 374, Special edition in Maltese: Chapter 13 Volume 015 pp. 355 – 374, Special edition in Polish: Chapter 13 Volume 015 pp. 355 – 374, Special edition in Slovak: Chapter 13 Volume 015 pp. 355 – 374, Special edition in Slovene: Chapter 13 Volume 015 pp. 355 – 374, Special edition in Bulgarian: Chapter 13 Volume 017 pp. 10 – 29, Special edition in Romanian: Chapter 13 Volume 017 pp. 10 – 29, Special edition in Croatian: Chapter 13 Volume 007 pp. 88 – 107. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/en/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A31995L0046Directive 98/44/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council, of 6 July 1998, on the legal protection of biotechnological inventions. OJ L 213, 30 July 1998, pp. 13–21. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=celex%3A31998L0044
Directive 98/79/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council, of 27 October 1998, on in vitro diagnostic medical devices. OJ L 331, 7 December 1998, pp. 1–37. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=celex:31998L0079
Directive 2001/83/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council, of 6 November 2001, on the Community code relating to medicinal products for human use. OJ L 311, 28 November 2001, pp. 67–128. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=celex:32001L0083
Directive 2001/20/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council, of 4 April 2001, on the approximation of the laws, regulations and administrative provisions of the Member States relating to the implementation of good clinical practice in the conduct of clinical trials on medicinal products for human use. OJ L 121, 1 May 2001, p. 34. https://ec.europa.eu/health/sites/health/files/files/eudralex/vol-1/dir_2001_20/dir_2001_20_en.pdf
Directive 2001/83/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council, of 6 November 2001, on the Community code relating to medicinal products for human use. OJ L 311, 28 November 2001, pp. 67–128. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=celex:32001L0083
Directive 2004/23/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council, of 31 March 2004, on setting standards of quality and safety for the donation, procurement, testing, processing, preservation, storage and distribution of human tissues and cells. OJ L 102, 7 April 2004, pp. 48–58. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=celex%3A32004L0023
Directive 2006/54/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council, of 5 July 2006, on the implementation of the principle of equal opportunities and equal treatment of men and women in matters of employment and occupation (recast). OJ L 204, 26 July 2006, pp. 23–36 (ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, SK, SL, FI, SV), Special edition in Bulgarian: Chapter 05 Volume 008 pp. 262 – 275, Special edition in Romanian: Chapter 05 Volume 008 pp. 262 – 275, Special edition in Croatian: Chapter 05 Volume 001 pp. 246 – 259. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/ALL/?uri=celex%3A32006L0054
Directive 2011/24/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council, of 9 March 2011, on the application of patients’ rights in cross-border healthcare. OJ L 88, 4.4.2011, pp. 45–65, Special edition in Croatian: Chapter 15 Volume 014 pp. 165 – 185. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A32011L0024
Directive (EU) 2016/680 of the European Parliament and of the Council, of 27 April 2016, on the protection of natural persons with regard to the processing of personal data by competent authorities for the purposes of the prevention, investigation, detection or prosecution of criminal offences or the execution of criminal penalties, and on the free movement of such data, and repealing Council Framework Decision 2008/977/JHA. OJ L 119, 4 May 2016, pp. 89–131. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=uriserv%3AOJ.L_.2016.119.01.0089.01.ENG
European Union, Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, 26 October 2012, 2012/C 326/02. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A12012P%2FTXT
Regulation (EC) No 726/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council, of 31 March 2004, laying down Community procedures for the authorisation and supervision of medicinal products for human and veterinary use and establishing a European Medicines Agency (Text with EEA relevance). OJ L 136, 30 April 2004, pp. 1–33. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=celex%3A32004R0726
Regulation (EC) No 1905/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council, of 18 December 2006, establishing a financing instrument for development cooperation. OJ L 378, 27 December 2006, pp. 41–71 (ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, SK, SL, FI, SV), Special edition in Bulgarian: Chapter 11 Volume 051 pp. 232 – 262, Special edition in Romanian: Chapter 11 Volume 051 pp. 232 – 262, Special edition in Croatian: Chapter 11 Volume 028 pp. 92 – 122. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A32006R1905
Regulation (EC) No 1394/2007 of the European Parliament and of the Council, of 13 November 2007, on advanced therapy medicinal products and amending Directive 2001/83/EC and Regulation (EC) No 726/2004 (Text with EEA relevance). OJ L 324, 10 December 2007, p. 121–137. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/ALL/?uri=celex%3A32007R1394
Regulation (EC) No 1567/2003 of the European Parliament and of the Council, of 15 July 2003, on aid for policies and actions on reproductive and sexual health and rights in developing countries. OJ L 224, 6 September 2003, pp. 1–6 (ES, DA, DE, EL, EN, FR, IT, NL, PT, FI, SV), Special edition in Czech: Chapter 11 Volume 048 pp. 24 – 2, Special edition in Estonian: Chapter 11 Volume 048 pp. 24 – 29, Special edition in Latvian: Chapter 11 Volume 048 pp. 24 – 29, Special edition in Lithuanian: Chapter 11 Volume 048 pp. 24 – 29, Special edition in Hungarian Chapter 11 Volume 048 pp. 24 – 29, Special edition in Maltese: Chapter 11 Volume 048 pp. 24 – 29, Special edition in Polish: Chapter 11 Volume 048 pp. 24 – 29, Special edition in Slovak: Chapter 11 Volume 048 pp. 24 – 29, Special edition in Slovene: Chapter 11 Volume 048 pp. 24 – 29. https://publications.europa.eu/en/publication-detail/-/publication/e2881dc1-68f0-4ff8-a522-abf81678f673/language-en
Regulation (EU) 2017/745 of the European Parliament and of the Council, of 5 April 2017, on medical devices, amending Directive 2001/83/EC, Regulation (EC) No 178/2002 and Regulation (EC) No 1223/2009 and repealing Council Directives 90/385/EEC and 93/42/EEC (Text with EEA relevance). OJ L 117, 5 May 2017, pp. 1–175. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A32017R0745
Regulation (EU) No 536/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council, of 16 April 2014, on clinical trials on medicinal products for human use, and repealing Directive 2001/20/EC Text with EEA relevance. OJ L 158, 27 May
, pp. 1–76. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX:32014R0536
Regulation (EU) 2016/679 of the European Parliament and of the Council, of 27 April 2016, on the protection of natural persons with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data, and repealing Directive 95/46/EC (General Data Protection Regulation) (Text with EEA relevance). OJ L 119, 4 May 2016, pp. 1–88. https://publications.europa.eu/en/publication-detail/-/publication/3e485e15-11bd-11e6-ba9a-01aa75ed71a1/language-en
Regulation (EU) 2017/746 of the European Parliament and of the Council, of 5 April 2017, on in vitro diagnostic medical devices and repealing Directive 98/79/EC and Commission Decision 2010/227/EU (Text with EEA relevance). OJ L 117, 5 May 2017, pp. 176–332. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A32017R0746
UN General Assembly, International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, of 16 December 1966, United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 993, p. 3. https://www.ohchr.org/en/professionalinterest/pages/cescr.aspx
UN General Assembly, Universal Declaration of Human Rights, of 10 December 1948, 217 A (III). http://www.un.org/en/universal-declaration-human-rights/
United Nations, Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, of 23 May 1969, United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 1155, p. 331. https://treaties.un.org/doc/Publication/UNTS/Volume%201155/volume-1155-I-18232-English.pdf
Case law/Jurisprudencia;
Enlarged Board of Appeal of the European Patent Office
Enlarged Board of Appeal of the European Patent Office (EPO), G 0002/06 (Use of embryos/WARF) of 25 November 2008.
European Court of Justice;
Case C-167/12 C. D. v S. T. [GC] 2014 ECR Reports of Cases - published in the electronic Reports of Cases (Court Reports - general). https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A62012CA0167
Case C-32/93 Carole Louise Webb v EMO Air Cargo (UK) Ltd. 1994 ECR I-03567. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A61993CJ0032
Case C-29/69 Erich Stauder v City of Ulm - Sozialamt 1969 ECR 419.
Case C‑337/11 HK Danmark, acting on behalf of Jette Ring v Dansk almennyttigt Boligselskab(C‑335/11) and HK Danmark, acting on behalf of Lone Skouboe Werge v Dansk Arbejdsgiverforening, acting on behalf of Pro Display A/S (C‑337/11) 2013 ECR Reports of Cases - published in the electronic Reports of Cases (Court Reports - general). https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A62011CJ0335
Case C-11/70 Internationale Handelsgesellschaft mbH v Einfuhr- und Vorratsstelle für Getreide und Futtermittel 1970 ECR 1125.
Case C-364/13 International Stem Cell Corporation v Comptroller General of Patents, Designs and Trade Marks [GC] 2014 ECR Reports of Cases - published in the electronic Reports of Cases (Court Reports - general). https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A62013CJ0364
Case C-595/12 Loredana Napoli v Ministero della Giustizia - Dipartimento dell’Amministrazione penitenziaria 2014 ECR Digital reports (Court Reports - general). https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/FR/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A62012CJ0595
Case C-4/73 J. Nold, Kohlen- und Baustoffgroßhandlung v Commission of the European Communities 1974 ECR 491.
Case C-377/98 Kingdom of the Netherlands v European Parliament and Council of the European Union 2001 ECR I-07079. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A61998CJ0377
Case C-34/10 Oliver Brüstle v Greenpeace eV. [GC] 2011 ECR I-09821. https://curia.europa.eu/juris/liste.jsf?language=en&num=C-34/10
C-36/02 Omega Spielhallen- und Automatenaufstellungs-GmbH v Oberbürgermeisterin der Bundesstadt Bonn 2004 ECR I-09609. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/IT/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A62002CJ0036
Case C-158/96 Raymond Kohll v Union des caisses de maladie 1998 ECR I-01931. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A61996CJ0158
Case C-506/06 Sabine Mayr v Bäckerei und Konditorei Gerhard Flöckner OHG [GC] 2008 ECR I-01017. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/IT/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A62006CJ0506#
Case C-555/07 Seda Kücükdeveci v Swedex GmbH & Co. KG [GC] 2010 ECR I-00365. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A62007CJ0555
Case C-372/04 The Queen, on the application of Yvonne Watts v Bedford Primary Care Trust and Secretary of State for Health [GC] 2006 ECR I-04325. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A62004CJ0372
Case C-159/90 The Society for the Protection of Unborn Children Ireland Ltd v Stephen Grogan and others 1991 ECR I-04685. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A61990CJ0159
Case C-144/04 Werner Mangold v Rüdiger Helm [GC] 2005 ECR I-09981. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/IT/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A62004CJ0144
Case C-363/12 Z v A Government Department, The Board of Management of a Community School [GC] 2014 ECR Reports of Cases - published in the electronic Reports of Cases (Court Reports - general). https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A62012CA0363
Opinion of the Advocate General Cruz Villalón, delivered on 17 July 2014, Case C-364/13 International Stem Cell Corporation v Comptroller General of Patents, Designs and Trade Marks. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/GA/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A62013CC0364
Opinion of Mr Advocate General Jacobs delivered on 14 June 2001, Case C- 377/98 Kingdom of the Netherlands v European Parliament and Council of the European Union. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/GA/TXT/?uri=CELEX:61998CC0377
Opinion of the Advocate General Kokott, delivered on 26 September 2013, Case C-167/12 C.D. v. S.T. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A62012CC0167
European Court of Human Rights;
A, B and C v. Ireland [GC], 2010-VI Eur. Ct. H.R. 185. https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng#{%22fulltext%22:[%22a.%20b%20and%20c%22],%22itemid%22:[%22001-102332%22]}
Airey v. Ireland, 3 Eur. Ct. H.R. (Ser. A) (1979). https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng#{%22fulltext%22:[%22AIREY%22],%22documentcollectionid2%22:[%22GRANDCHAMBER%22,%22CHAMBER%22],%22itemid%22:[%22001-57420%22]}
Advisory opinion concerning the recognition in domestic law of a legal parent-child relationship between a child born through a gestational surrogacy arrangement abroad and the intended mother, Requested by the French Court of Cassation (Request No. P16-2018-001), European Court of Human Rights (Grand Chamber), 10 April 2019, pag. 15, para, 1. https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng#{%22itemid%22:[%22003-6380464-8364383%22]}
Costa and Pavan v. Italy, Eur. Ct. H.R., Strasbourg 28 August 2012. https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng#{%22fulltext%22:[%22costa%22],%22documentcollectionid2%22:[%22GRANDCHAMBER%22,%22CHAMBER%22],%22itemid%22:[%22001-112993%22]}
D. and Others v. Belgium, Eur. Ct. H.R., Strasbourg 8 July 2014. https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng#{“itemid”:[“001-146420”]}
Demir and Baykara v Turkey [GC], 2008-V Eur. Ct. H.R. 333. https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/fre#{%22itemid%22:[%22001-89558%22]}
Evans v. the United Kingdom [GC], 2007-I Eur. Ct. H.R. 353. https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng#{%22fulltext%22:[%22evans%22],%22documentcollectionid2%22:[%22GRANDCHAMBER%22,%22CHAMBER%22],%22itemid%22:[%22001-80046%22]}
Foulon et Bouvet v. France, Eur. Ct. H.R., Strasbourg 21 July 2016. https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng#{%22itemid%22:[%22001-164968%22]}
Glass v. the United Kingdom, 2004-II Eur. Ct. H.R. 25. https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng#{%22fulltext%22:[%22glass%22],%22documentcollectionid2%22:[%22GRANDCHAMBER%22,%22CHAMBER%22],%22itemid%22:[%22001-61663%22]}
Goodwin v United Kingdom, 2002-VI Eur. Ct. H.R. 1. http://hudoc.echr.coe.int/fre?i=001-57974
Hirst v. the United Kingdom (2) [GC], 2005-IX Eur. Ct. H.R. 187. https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng#{%22dmdocnumber%22:[%22787485%22],%22itemid%22:[%22001-70442%22]}
Konstantin Markin v. Russia, 2012-V Eur. Ct. H.R. 1. https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng#{%22fulltext%22:[%22konstantin%22],%22documentcollectionid2%22:[%22GRANDCHAMBER%22,%22CHAMBER%22],%22itemid%22:[%22001-109868%22]}
Labassee v. France, Eur. Ct. H.R., Strasbourg 26 June 2014. https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng#{%22itemid%22:[%22001-145180%22]}
Ilgar Mammadov v. Azerbaijan, Eur. Ct. H.R., Strasbourg 22 May 2014. https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng#{%22fulltext%22:[%22mammadov%22],%22documentcollectionid2%22:[%22GRANDCHAMBER%22,%22CHAMBER%22],%22itemid%22:[%22001-144124%22]}
Ilgar Mammadov v. Azerbaijan, Eur. Ct. H.R., Key Case, Strasbourg, 29 May 2019. https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng#{%22fulltext%22:[%22mammadov%22],%22documentcollectionid2%22:[%22GRANDCHAMBER%22,%22CHAMBER%22],%22itemid%22:[%22001-193543%22]}
Mennesson v. France, 2014-III Eur. Ct. H.R. 219. https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng#{%22fulltext%22:[%22mennesson%22],%22itemid%22:[%22001-145179%22]};
Oao Neftyanaya Kompaniya Yukos v. Russia, Eur. Ct. H.R., Strasbourg 20 September 2011. https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng#{%22fulltext%22:[%22yukos%22],%22documentcollectionid2%22:[%22GRANDCHAMBER%22,%22CHAMBER%22],%22itemid%22:[%22001-106308%22]}
Open Door and Dublin Well Woman v. Ireland, 68 Eur. Ct. H.R. 244 (1992). https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng#{%22fulltext%22:[%22open%20doors%22],%22documentcollectionid2%22:[%22GRANDCHAMBER%22,%22CHAMBER%22],%22itemid%22:[%22001-57789%22]}
Paradiso and Campanelli v. Italy, Eur. Ct. H.R., Strasbourg 27 January 2015. https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng#{%22itemid%22:[%22001-151056%22]}
Paradiso and Campanelli v. Italy [GC], 2017 Eur. Ct. H.R. https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng#{%22fulltext%22:[%22paradiso%22],%22documentcollectionid2%22:[%22GRANDCHAMBER%22,%22CHAMBER%22],%22itemid%22:[%22001-170359%22]}
Parrillo v. Italy, Eur. Ct. H.R, Strasbourg 28 May 2013. https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng#{%22itemid%22:[%22001-141613%22]}
Parrillo v. Italy [GC], 2015-V Eur. Ct. H.R. 141. https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng#{%22fulltext%22:[%22parrillo%22],%22documentcollectionid2%22:[%22GRANDCHAMBER%22,%22CHAMBER%22],%22itemid%22:[%22001-157263%22]}
Pretty v. the United Kingdom, 2002-III Eur. Ct. H.R. 155. https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng#{%22fulltext%22:[%22pretty%22],%22documentcollectionid2%22:[%22GRANDCHAMBER%22,%22CHAMBER%22],%22itemid%22:[%22001-60448%22]}
R.R. v. Poland, 2011-III Eur. Ct. H.R. 209. https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/fre#{%22itemid%22:[%22001-104911%22]}
S.H. and Others v. Austria [GC], 2011-V Eur. Ct. H.R. 295. https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng#{%22fulltext%22:[%22s.h.%22],%22documentcollectionid2%22:[%22GRANDCHAMBER%22,%22CHAMBER%22],%22itemid%22:[%22001-107325%22]}
Tyrer v United Kingdom, Merits, 26 Eur. Ct. H.R. (ser. A) (1978). https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/fre#{%22itemid%22:[%22001-57587%22]}
Tysiac v. Poland, 2007-I EEur. Ct. H.R. 219. https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng#{%22itemid%22:[%22001-79812%22]}
Vo. v. France (App. No. 53924/00) (2004) VIII ECHR 326, (2005) 40 EHRR 12. https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng#{%22itemid%22:[%22001-61887%22]}
Inter-American Court of Human Rights;
Case of Artavia Murillo et al. (“In vitro fertilization”) v. Costa Rica, Preliminary Objections, Merits, Reparations and Costs, Judgment, Inter-Am. Ct. H.R. (ser. C) No. 257, (28 Nov. 2012). https://www.corteidh.or.cr/docs/casos/articulos/seriec_257_ing.pdf
Matter of B., Provisional Measures regarding El Salvador, Order, Inter-Am. Ct. H.R., (29 May 2013). https://www.corteidh.or.cr/docs/medidas/B_se_01_ing.pdf
Descargas
Publicado
Cómo citar
Número
Sección
Licencia
Aquellos autores/as que tengan publicaciones con esta revista, aceptan los términos siguientes:- Los autores/as conservarán sus derechos de autor y garantizarán a la revista el derecho de primera publicación de su obra, el cuál estará simultáneamente sujeto a la Licencia de reconocimiento de Creative Commons que permite a terceros compartir la obra siempre que se indique su autor y su primera publicación esta revista.
- Los autores/as podrán adoptar otros acuerdos de licencia no exclusiva de distribución de la versión de la obra publicada (p. ej.: depositarla en un archivo telemático institucional o publicarla en un volumen monográfico) siempre que se indique la publicación inicial en esta revista.
- Se permite y recomienda a los autores/as difundir su obra a través de Internet (p. ej.: en archivos telemáticos institucionales o en su página web) antes y durante el proceso de envío, lo cual puede producir intercambios interesantes y aumentar las citas de la obra publicada. (Véase El efecto del acceso abierto).
- Resumen 298
- pdf (English) 151
- html (English) 23
