So what if time is of the essence?

This article is concerned with the remedies available for delay in the performance of contractual obligations, and in particular with the proper analysis of the question whether time is of the essence. The law in this area is both difficult and complex, not only with regard to whether time is of the essence in any given case, but also with regard to what this entails. It is argued that many of the difficulties arise from the ambiguous and inconsistent way in which the courts have approached the question whether time is of the essence, the concept being used in several distinct, albeit related, senses. The article seeks to demonstrate that the law relating to the topic is unnecessarily complicated, and to suggest ways in which it might be simplified.

Cinderella comes to the Ball: Article 14 and the right to non-discrimination in the ECHR

Article 14 ECHR has often been derided as a Cinderella provision, but during the last few years, this has started to change. This article examines how Article 14 has developed, and may live up to its potential as a powerful non-discrimination principle. The case law developments in relation to the “ambit” requirement in Article 14, the development of indirect discrimination case law, and the approval of positive action, all point to a more substantive conception of equality, which offers protection to disadvantaged and vulnerable groups.

‘Governing (Through) Rights: Statistics as Technologies of Governmentality’

An increasing amount of attention is being given to the use of human rights measurement indicators in monitoring ‘progress’ in rights and there is consequently a growing focus on statistics and information. This article concentrates on the use of statistics in rights discourse, with reference to the new human rights institution for the European Union: the Fundamental Rights Agency. The article has two main objectives: first, to show that statistics operate as technologies of governmentality – by explaining that statistics both govern rights and govern through rights. Second, the article discusses the implications that this has for rights discourse – rights become a discourse of governmentality, that is a normalizing and regulating discourse. In doing so, the article stresses the importance of critique and questioning new socio-legal methodologies, which involve the collection and dissemination of information and data (statistics), in rights discourse.