CYIL vol. 8 (2017)

ALLA TYMOFEYEVA CYIL 8 ȍ2017Ȏ studies do not all reach the same conclusions as to the definition of these concepts. However, for the purposes of current study both views will be viewed as interchangeable. The author opted for ‘indirect obligations’ in the title, because this phrase is more commonly used in comparison to ‘indirect duties’. The next concept to be explained for the purposes of this essay is a ‘business entity’ . In general, it signifies any form through which the business activity is conducted. 14 Corporations, limited liability companies and sole proprietorships are often recognised as types of common business entities. However, they may take a form of many other types of legal persons, e.g. joint-stock companies, cooperatives, partnerships, statutory companies, holding companies, subsidiary companies and others. The exact title depends on the domestic legislation of the state under whose law the entity was incorporated. For example, the name ‘Société à responsabilité limitée’ in France is similar to a ‘private limited company’ under the legislation of the United Kingdom and a ‘limited liability company’ in the meaning of the United States law. Business entities are established primarily with the aim to consolidate income. Non- profit entities, namely non-governmental organisations (hereinafter also ‘NGO’), are usually excluded from this definition. 15 Therefore, the notion ‘ business entity’ in this manuscript will signify any type of legal person carrying out its activities for the purposes of producing a profit . In order to make the role of business entities in a proceeding before the European Court of Human Rights more understandable, it is important to provide a brief explanation on the Convention system as a whole. The key research question is whether the mechanism based on the Convention as an international treaty may impose any type of obligations on this type of legal persons. The Convention system and obligations of business entities The Convention in its Article 1 titled ‘Obligation to respect Human Rights’ sets forth that “[t]he High Contracting Parties shall secure to everyone within their jurisdiction the rights and freedoms defined in Section I of this Convention”. 16 This provision visibly stipulates that the direct obligations under this treaty are imposed on the contracting parties that are the states, which have ratified this instrument. Currently, there are 47 states acknowledging their obligations under the Convention. 17 Initially the Convention targeted only states but in the course of advancing its application there has appeared a place for the accession of international organisations. In particular, Article 59, paragraph 2 of the Convention, as amended by Protocol No. 14 to the Convention, which entered into force on 1 June 2010, stipulates that “the European Union may accede to this Convention”. 18 The accession of the European Union (hereinafter also 14 MAISTO, Guglielmo, The Meaning of “enterprise”, “business” and “business profits” Under Tax Treaties and EU Tax Law . IBFD Publications, Amsterdam, 2011, p. 584. 15 FLOOD, Joanne M., Wiley GAAP 2016: Interpretation and Application of Generally Accepted Accounting Principles . John Wiley & Sons, Chichester, 2015, p. 1295. 16 Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms. ETS No. 005. Rome, 4 November 1950. 17 Chart of signatures and ratifications of the Convention. Status as of 18 May 2017 is available on https://www. coe.int/en/web/conventions/full-list/-/conventions/treaty/005/signatures?p_auth=LT4uUCUj. 18 Protocol No. 14 to the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, amending the control system of the Convention. CETS No. 194. Strasbourg, 13 May 2004. 1.

294