Mapping austerity-based 'Crisis Law' before the European Court of Human Rights: an exploration of the impact of the court's interpretive ethic upon its derived legitimacy

This thesis maps the approach of the European Court of Human Rights to ‘Crisis Law’ or austerity-based case-law. In tracking the development of this Crisis Law, a full analysis of how the Court has responded to such claims of austerity-based rights infringements will be explored. This mapping of Crisis Law reveals a number of significant strands which are addressed through the three parts of this thesis. Firstly, the thesis explores the extent to which the European Convention on Human Rights affords protection to rightsholders experiencing rights infringements by states in efforts to implement austerity policies. Secondly, a critical analysis of the Court’s approach to Crisis Law engages ongoing debates regarding the interpretive role of the Court. The Court’s unique interpretive approach to Crisis Law, affords a novel means of engaging with analysis of the contextual influence of the Court’s role, perceived legitimacy and general discourse on the reform and development of the Court. Finally considering whether the approach of the Court to Crisis Law affects or undermines the nature of the Court’s legitimacy