A revolution is quietly taking place in the case law of the European Court of Human Rights (‘ECtHR’, ‘the Court’ or ‘the Strasbourg Court’). Without occasioning much comment, the Court is increasingly relying on vulnerability reasoning. The aim of this chapter is to analyse that development and discover what potential the concept of vulnerability has to improve the legal reasoning of the ECtHR. By ‘improving the legal reasoning’ I have something specific in mind, namely the question of how to include more fully and consistently the specific concerns of marginalized people into the legal tests used by the ECtHR.2