The conclusion of historical and normative parts of the study is that the extension of human rights to companies in the A1P1 ECHR was not necessitated by a sui genesis European liberal conception of human rights. Rather it was the result of a political compromise manifested in a text that obscured the breadth of the legal, proprietary rights protected and the inclusion of private companies as subjects of the rights. The subsequent review of the Court’s jurisprudence on IPRs shows that, regrettably, the Court did not correct the text’s hidden deviation from the moral ideal of universal human rights which the ECHR sought to enforce. The conclusion canvasses three possible scenarios for the futureandoutlines how the Court could develop its jurisprudence to recalibrate the balance of protection of companies IPRs in line with international human rights.