Слайд 2
![What is a Case-Brief? “Written, analytic summaries of appellate opinions”](/_ipx/f_webp&q_80&fit_contain&s_1440x1080/imagesDir/jpg/354240/slide-1.jpg)
What is a Case-Brief?
“Written, analytic summaries of appellate opinions” (Calleros, p.
90)
Analytical tool (check list)
Helps to read and compare cases:
Helps to distil legal principles underlying the decisions
Helps to get the essence of legal principles and the rationale behind it
Helps to understand how the principles
would apply to a different set of facts
Слайд 3
![Case-Brief Elements Identification Facts Procedural History Issue Holding Reasoning](/_ipx/f_webp&q_80&fit_contain&s_1440x1080/imagesDir/jpg/354240/slide-2.jpg)
Case-Brief Elements
Identification
Facts
Procedural History
Issue
Holding
Reasoning
Слайд 4
![Identification Name of the case The name of the court](/_ipx/f_webp&q_80&fit_contain&s_1440x1080/imagesDir/jpg/354240/slide-3.jpg)
Identification
Name of the case
The name of the court
(ECtHR or ECJ/CJEU)
Level
of the court
(i.e. there are different judicial formations within the ECtHR)
Type and date of the decision
Number of the case / application
Examples:
ECJ, Hilde Schönheit v. Stadt Frankfurt am Main and Silvia Becker v. Land Hessen, Judgment of 23 October 2003, cases C-4/02 and C-5/02
ECtHR [GC], D.H. and Others v. the Czech Republic, Judgment of 13 November 2007, Application No. 57325/00
Слайд 5
![Facts Principal facts (the ones that are relevant to the](/_ipx/f_webp&q_80&fit_contain&s_1440x1080/imagesDir/jpg/354240/slide-4.jpg)
Facts
Principal facts (the ones that are relevant to the outcome), including
the national courts decisions
If the facts are disputed by the parties, each party’s version of events should be presented
Procedural History
How and when the case originated in ECtHR or ECJ/CJEU
Where there any procedural steps taken by the court
Слайд 6
![Issue What is the gist of the case – a](/_ipx/f_webp&q_80&fit_contain&s_1440x1080/imagesDir/jpg/354240/slide-5.jpg)
Issue
What is the gist of the case – a main question
- the formulation should be sufficiently narrow
Question of law and fact
- what legal principles should apply to particular facts of the case
- how does the law that parties agree on applies to particular facts of the case
- what the law should be
Holding
What the court decided (who won)
An answer to the question (issue)
- starts with ‘yes’ or ‘no’
Слайд 7
![Reasoning How the court explained / substantiated its decision What](/_ipx/f_webp&q_80&fit_contain&s_1440x1080/imagesDir/jpg/354240/slide-6.jpg)
Reasoning
How the court explained / substantiated its decision
What is the applicable
legal source(s), rule(s) / principle(s), test(s)
How did the court apply these principles / rules to the facts in hand:
- Through what steps did the court analyze the facts of the case
- What facts did the court take into account to arrive to a certain decision (significance of certain facts)