1. Opinion of the Court of March 28, 1997 on Accession by the Community to the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, 1996 E.C.R. I-1759, para 27.
2. Alston Philip & Weiler J.H.H. , An ‘Ever Closer Union’ in Need of a Human Rights Policy: The European Union and Human Rights, in The EU and Human Rights 3, 23 (Philip Alston, Mara Bustelo & James Heenan eds., 1999).
3. See, e.g., Hoechst AG v. Comm'n, CJEU Cases 46/87 & 227/87, 1989 E.C.R. 2859, para. 17 (illustrating that the CJEU refused to extend the protection of Article 8 ECHR to business premises “because there are not inconsiderable divergences between the legal systems of the Member States in regard to the nature and degree of protection afforded”). The required “commonality” was later supplied by the European Court of Human Rights in Niemietz v. Germany, ECHR App. No. 13710/88, 251 Eur. Ct. H.R. (ser. A) (1992), and the CJEU changed its approach accordingly. See, Roquettes Frères SA v. Directeur général de la concurrence, de la consommation et de la répression des fraudes, CJEU Case C-94/00, 2002 E.C.R. I-9011.
4. See, e.g., Leonard Besselink, The Protection of Fundamental Rights post-Lisbon: The Interaction Between the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, the European Convention on Human Rights and National Constitutions, in Reports Of The Fide Congress Tallin 1, 10–16 (2012), available at http://www.fide2012.eu/index.php?doc_id=94.
5. Id. at para. 39.