A Network Analysis for Determining the Topics and Precedents of Article 1 of Protocol No 1 (A1P1) to the European Convention on Human Rights

Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 (A1P1) of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), which protects the right to property, is one of the most litigated provisions of the ECHR. A1P1 mentions the peaceful enjoyment of property and provides requirements for the deprivation of property and the control of its use. Previous research shows that most of the scholarship is centered around a limited number of landmark cases that establish a set of three rules used to approach cases under this article. The entire body of case law relating to A1P1 has not yet been studied in an integral manner and this paper therefore sets out to explore what overview emerges if such a study is carried out.

This study aims to uncover sub-topics in A1P1 judgments, identify central judgments within these sub-topics, and describe rules at play in the central judgments. It was expected that the judgments would cluster around the three rules identified in the ECHR and legal scholarship and around other major doctrines such as the fair balance test.

A combination of network analysis and doctrinal analysis reveals scattered doctrines that include links to other fundamental rights, positive state obligations, and general approaches. While the three rules remain central to A1P1 case law, the analysis of judgments reveals a more layered doctrinal structure. Beyond the conventional framework, the Court often makes assessments based on the specific circumstances of the case. This finding, which moves beyond abstract principles to fact-sensitive reasoning, introduces a degree of complexity that has not been fully acknowledged in existing legal scholarship.

The study shows this complexity, suggests new avenues for understanding A1P1-case law, and offers practical insights for litigants, scholars, and judges engaging with A1P1 judgments.