TrustHLT/LaCour huggingface dataset:
Hearing: Kurt v. Austria (no. 62903/15) (Grand Chamber hearing, 2020-06-17 00:00:00)
Case: CASE OF KURT v. AUSTRIA
Document type: CHAMBER
Document date: 2019-07-04 00:00:00
Articles of the Convention concerned: 2, 2-1
Issue: Sections 382b (protection from violence in the home) and 382e (procedure and issuance) of the Enforcement Act
Conclusion: No violation of Article 2 - Right to life (Article 2 - Positive obligations;Article 2-1 - Life) (Substantive aspect)
Strasbourg case-law cited: Budayeva and Others v. Russia, nos. 15339/02 and 4 others, § 129, ECHR 2008 (extracts);Calvelli and Ciglio v. Italy [GC], no. 32967/96, § 48, ECHR 2002 I;Fernandes de Oliveira v. Portugal [GC], no. 78103/14, 31 January 2019;Giuliani and Gaggio v. Italy [GC], no. 24458/02, § 174;Kolyadenko and Others v. Russia, nos. 17423/05 and 5 others, § 157, 28 February 2012;Kontrová v. Slovakia, no. 7510/04, 31 May 2007;Öneryıldız v. Turkey, [GC] no. 48939/99, § 89, ECHR  2004-XII;Opuz v. Turkey, no. 33401/02, ECHR 2;Osman v. the United Kingdom, 28 October 1998, Reports of Judgments and Decisions 1998-VIII;Soering v. the United Kingdom, 7 July 1989, § 88, Series A no. 161;Talpis v. Italy, no. 41237/14, 2 March 2017
Hearing: Kurt v. Austria (no. 62903/15) (Grand Chamber hearing, 2020-06-17 00:00:00)
Case: CASE OF KURT v. AUSTRIA
Document type: GRANDCHAMBER
Document date: 2021-06-15 00:00:00
Articles of the Convention concerned: 2, 2-1, 5, 5-1, 35, 35-1
Issue: Section 38a of the Security Police Act ; Sections 382b and 382e of the Enforcement Act
Conclusion: Preliminary objection joined to merits (Art. 35) Admissibility criteria;(Art. 35-1) Exhaustion of domestic remedies;Remainder inadmissible (Art. 35) Admissibility criteria;(Art. 35-1) Six-month period;No violation of Article 2 - Right to life (Article 2 - Positive obligations;Article 2-1 - Life) (Substantive aspect)
Strasbourg case-law cited: B. v. the Republic of Moldova, no. 61382/09, §§ 52-53, 16 July 2013;Bălşan v. Romania, no. 49645/09, § 62, 23 May 2017;Barsova v. Russia, no. 20289/10, § 35, 22 October 2019;Bennich Zalewski v. Poland, no. 59857/00, § 98, 22 April 2008;Branko Tomašić and Others v. Croatia, no. 46598/06, §§ 52 and 58, 15 January 2009;Bubbins v. the United Kingdom, no. 50196/99, § 147, ECHR 2005-II (extracts);Buzadji v. the Republic of Moldova [GC], no. 23755/07, §§ 92 and 102, 5 July 2016;Calvelli and Ciglio v. Italy [GC], no. 32967/96, § 48, ECHR 2002‑I;Clooth v. Belgium, 12 December 1991, § 40, Series A no. 225;Denisov v. Ukraine [GC], no. 76639/11, §§ 135-36, 25 September 201;Eremia v. the Republic of Moldova, no. 3564/11, §§ 59-60, 28 May 2013;Fernandes de Oliveira v. Portugal [GC], no. 78103/14, § 81, 31 January 2019;Fernandes de Oliveira v. Portugal, no. 78103/14, § 49, 28 March 2017;Halime Kılıç v. Turkey, no. 63034/11, 28 June 2016;Jėčius v. Lithuania, no. 34578/97, § 50, ECHR 2000 IX;Kontrová v. Slovakia, no. 7510/04, 31 May 2007;M.G. v. Turkey, no. 646/10, § 93, 22 March 2016;McCann and Others v. the United Kingdom, 27 September 1995, § 147, Series A no. 324;Mudric v. the Republic of Moldova, no. 74839/10, § 51, 16 July 2013;Munteanu v. Moldova, no. 34168/11, § 70, 26 May 2020;Opuz v. Turkey, no. 33401/02, ECHR 2009;Osman v. the United Kingdom, §§ 115-16, 28 October 1998, Reports of Judgments and Decisions 1998 VIII;Ostendorf v. Germany, no. 15598/08, 7 March 2013;S., V. and A. v. Denmark [GC], nos. 35553/12 and 2 others, 22 October 2018;Şahin Alpay v. Turkey, no. 16538/17, § 103, 20 March 2018;Schwabe and M.G. v. Germany, nos. 8080/08 and 8577/08, § 72, ECHR 2011 (extracts);T.M. and C.M. v.  the Republic of Moldova, no. 26608/11, § 46, 28 January 2014;Talpis v. Italy, no. 41237/14, 2 March 2017;Valiulienė v. Lithuania, no. 33234/07, § 69, 26 March 2013;Volodina v. Russia, no. 41261/17, 9 July 2019
External sources: Article 51 of the Council of Europe Convention on preventing and combating violence against women and domestic violence
Hearing: Delfi AS v. Estonia (no. 64569/09) (Grand Chamber hearing, 2014-07-09 00:00:00)
Case: CASE OF DELFI AS v. ESTONIA
Document type: CHAMBER
Document date: 2013-10-10 00:00:00
Articles of the Convention concerned: 8, 8-1, 10, 10-1, 10-2, 35, 35-3
Issue: Information Society Services Act ; Articles 17, 19 and 45 of the Constitution of the Republic of Estonia ; Section 138 of the Civil Code (General Principles) Act ; Sections 134, 1043, 1045, 1046, 1047 and 1055 of the Obligations Act
Conclusion: Preliminary objections dismissed (Article 35-3 - Ratione materiae);No violation of Article 10 - Freedom of expression -{General} (Article 10-1 - Freedom of expression)
Strasbourg case-law cited: A. v. Norway, no. 28070/06, § 64, 9 April 2009;Animal Defenders International v. the United Kingdom [GC], no. 48876/08, § 100, 22 April 2013;Axel Springer AG v. Germany [GC], no. 39954/08, 7 February 2012;Bernh Larsen Holding AS and Others v. Norway, no. 24117/08, § 126, 14 March 2013;Bladet Tromsø and Stensaas v. Norway [GC], no. 21980/93, §§ 58-59, ECHR 1999-III;Cantoni v. France, 15 November 1996, § 35, Reports of Judgments and Decisions 1996-V;Castells v. Spain, 23 April 1992, § 46, Series A no. 236;Chauvy and Others v. France, no. 64915/01, §§ 43-45, ECHR 2004-VI;De Haes and Gijsels v. Belgium, 24 February 1997, § 37, Reports of Judgments and Decisions 1997-I;Editorial Board of Pravoye Delo and Shtekel v. Ukraine, no. 33014/05, §§ 60-68, ECHR 2011 (extracts);Hachette Filipacchi Associés v. France, no. 71111/01, 14 June 2007;Hertel v. Switzerland, 25 August 1998, § 46, Reports of Judgments and Decisions 1998-VI;Incal v. Turkey, 9 June 1998, § 54, Reports of Judgments and Decisions 1998-IV;Jersild v. Denmark, 23 September 1994, § 31, Series A no. 298;Krone Verlag GmbH & Co. KG v. Austria (no. 4), no. 72331/01, 9 November 2006;Lindon, Otchakovsky-Laurens and July v. France [GC], nos. 21279/02 and 36448/02, ECHR 2007-IV;MGN Limited v. the United Kingdom, no. 39401/04, § 142, 18 January 2011;Mosley v. the United Kingdom, no. 48009/08, § 111, 10 May 2011;Mouvement raëlien suisse v. Switzerland [GC], no. 16354/06, § 48, ECHR 2012 (extracts);Pérez de Rada Cavanilles v. Spain, 28 October 1998, § 43, Reports of Judgments and Decisions 1998-VIII;Pfeifer v. Austria, no. 12556/03, § 35, 15 November 2007;Polanco Torres and Movilla Polanco v. Spain, no. 34147/06, § 40, 21 September 2010;Prager and Oberschlick v. Austria, 26 April 1995, § 38, Series A no. 313;Radio France and Others v. France, no. 53984/00, §§ 20 and 30, ECHR 2004-II;Steel and Morris v. the United Kingdom, no. 68416/01, § 87, ECHR 2005-II;Tammer v. Estonia, no. 41205/98, § 62, ECHR 2001-I;Timciuc v. Romania (dec.), no. 28999/03, § 144, 12 October 2010;Times Newspapers Ltd v. the United Kingdom (nos. 1 and 2), nos. 3002/03 and 23676/03, §§ 20, 21 and 38, ECHR 2009;Von Hannover v. Germany (no. 2) [GC], nos. 40660/08 and 60641/08, ECHR 2012
External sources: Directive 2000/31/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 8 June 2000 on certain legal aspects of information society services, in particular electronic commerce, in the Internal Market
Hearing: Vinter and Others v. United Kingdom (no. 66069/09, 130/10 et 3896/10) (Grand Chamber hearing, 2012-11-28 00:00:00)
Case: CASE OF VINTER  AND OTHERS v. THE UNITED KINGDOM
Document type: CHAMBER
Document date: 2012-01-17 00:00:00
Articles of the Convention concerned: 3, 35
Conclusion: Remainder inadmissible;No violation of Article 3 - Prohibition of torture (Article 3 - Degrading punishment;Inhuman punishment) (Substantive aspect)
Strasbourg case-law cited: Hussain v. the United Kingdom and Prem Singh v. the United Kingdom, 21 February 1996, Reports 1996-I at paragraphs 53 and 61;Kafkaris v. Cyprus (no. 2) (dec.), no. 9644/09, 21 June 2011;Soering v. the United Kingdom, 7 July 1989, § 104, Series A no. 161;Stafford v. the United Kingdom [GC], no. 46295/99, ECHR 2002-IV
External sources: Articles 77 and 110 of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court
Hearing: Vinter and Others v. United Kingdom (no. 66069/09, 130/10 et 3896/10) (Grand Chamber hearing, 2012-11-28 00:00:00)
Case: CASE OF VINTER AND OTHERS v. THE UNITED KINGDOM
Document type: GRANDCHAMBER
Document date: 2013-07-09 00:00:00
Articles of the Convention concerned: 3, 41
Issue: The Criminal Justice Act 2003 ; The 1998 Human Rights Act
Conclusion: Violation of Article 3 - Prohibition of torture (Article 3 - Degrading punishment;Inhuman punishment) (Substantive aspect);Non-pecuniary damage - finding of violation sufficient
Strasbourg case-law cited: Boulois v. Luxembourg [GC], no. 37575/04, § 83, ECHR 2012;Choreftakis and Choreftaki v. Greece, no. 46846/08, § 45, 17 January 2012;Dickson v. the United Kingdom [GC], no. 44362/04, § 75, ECHR 2007-V;Gillberg v. Sweden [GC], no. 41723/06, § 53, 3 April 2012;Kafkaris v. Cyprus, [GC], no. 21906/04, ECHR 2008-...;Maiorano and Others v. Italy, no. 28634/06, 15 December 2009;Mastromatteo v. Italy [GC], no. 37703/97, § 72, ECHR 2002-VIII;Pretty v. the United Kingdom, no. 2346/02, § 65, ECHR 2002-III;Sawoniuk v. the United Kingdom (dec.), no. 63716/00, ECHR 2001-VI;T. v. the United Kingdom [GC], no. 24724/94, 16 December 1999;V. v. the United Kingdom [GC], no. 24888/94, ECHR 1999-IX;V.C. v. Slovakia, no. 18968/07, § 105, ECHR 2011 (extracts)
External sources: Rule 103 of the European Prison Rules;COE Committee of Ministers Resolution 76(2);COE Committee of Ministers Recommendation 2003(23) (on the management by prison administrations of life sentence and other long-term prisoners);
COE Committee of Ministers Recommendation 2003(22) (on conditional release);The United Nations Standard Minimum Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners;Article 10 § 3 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights;Article 110(4) and (5) of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court;Rules 223 and 224 of the ICC’s Rules of Procedure and Evidence;The CPT’s report on its visit to Switzerland from 10-20 October 2011 (25 October 2012 CPT/Inf (2012) 26)
Hearing: M.A. v. Denmark (no. 6697/18) (Grand Chamber hearing, 2020-06-10 00:00:00)
Case: M.A. v. DENMARK
Document type: COMMUNICATEDCASES
Articles of the Convention concerned: 8, 8-1, 14
Conclusion: Communicated
Hearing: Gestur Jónsson and Ragnar Halldór Hall v. Iceland (nos. 68273/14 and 68271/14) (Grand Chamber hearing, 2019-10-09 00:00:00)
Case: HALL v. ICELAND
Document type: COMMUNICATEDCASES
Articles of the Convention concerned: 6, 6-1, 6-3-d, 7, 7-1, P7-2
Conclusion: Communicated
Hearing: Gestur Jónsson and Ragnar Halldór Hall v. Iceland (nos. 68273/14 and 68271/14) (Grand Chamber hearing, 2019-10-09 00:00:00)
Case: JONSSON v. ICELAND
Document type: COMMUNICATEDCASES
Articles of the Convention concerned: 6, 6-1, 6-3-d, 7, 7-1, P7-2
Conclusion: Communicated
Hearing: Gestur Jónsson and Ragnar Halldór Hall v. Iceland (nos. 68273/14 and 68271/14) (Grand Chamber hearing, 2019-10-09 00:00:00)
Case: CASE OF GESTUR JÓNSSON AND RAGNAR HALLDÓR HALL v. ICELAND
Document type: CHAMBER
Document date: 2018-10-30 00:00:00
Articles of the Convention concerned: 6, 6-1, 7, 7-1, 35, 35-1
Issue: Sections 141 (1) 196, 205 (3) of the Criminal Procedures Act No. 88/2008
Conclusion: Preliminary objection dismissed (Art. 35) Admissibility criteria;(Art. 35-1) Exhaustion of domestic remedies;Remainder inadmissible (Art. 35) Admissibility criteria;(Art. 35-1) Exhaustion of domestic remedies;No violation of Article 6 - Right to a fair trial (Article 6 - Criminal proceedings;Article 6-1 - Fair hearing);No violation of Article 7 - No punishment without law (Article 7-1 - Nulla poena sine lege;Nullum crimen sine lege)
Strasbourg case-law cited: Azinas v. Cyprus [GC], no. 56679/00, ECHR 2004-III;Brown v. the United Kingdom (dec.), no. 38644/97, 24 November 1998;De Cubber v. Belgium, 26 October 1984, Series A no. 86;Del Río Prada v. Spain [GC], no. 42750/09, § 77, ECHR 2013;Hokkeling v. the Netherlands, no. 30749/12, § 58, 14 February 2017;Jorgic v. Germany, no. 74613/01, § 109, ECHR 2007-III;Kononov v. Latvia, [GC], no. 36376/04, § 198, ECHR 2010;Kyprianou v. Cyprus, [GC], no. 73797/01, § 64, 15 December 2005;Moreira Ferreira v. Portugal (no. 2) [GC], no. 19867/12, § 83, 11 July 2017;Nicklinson and Lamb v. the United Kingdom (dec.), nos. 2478/15 and 1787/15, 23 June 2015;Putz v. Austria, no. 18892/91, § 33, 22 February 1996;Ravnsborg v. Sweden, no. 14220/88, §§ 30-36, 23 February 1994;Schreiber and Boetsch v. France (dec.), no. 58751/00, 11 December 2003;Sejdovic v. Italy [GC], no. 56581/00, ECHR 2006 II;Sergey Zolotukhin v Russia, [GC], no. 14939/03, § 53, 10 February 2005;Shkalla v. Albania, no. 26866/05, § 67, 10 May 2011;T. v. Austria, no. 27783/95, §§ 61-67, 14 November 2000;Toyaksi and Others v. Turkey (dec.), no. 43569/08, 20 October2010;Unseen ehf v. Iceland, no. 55630/15, § 19, 20 March 2018;Vasiliauskas v. Lithuania [GC], no. 35343/05, § 154, ECHR 2015;Vučković and Others v. Serbia (preliminary objection) [GC], nos. 17153/11 and 29 others, §§ 69-70, 25 March 2014;Zaicevs v. Latvia, no. 65022/01, §§ 31-36, 31 July 2007;Zugic v. Croatia, no. 3699/08, 31 May 2011
Hearing: Gestur Jónsson and Ragnar Halldór Hall v. Iceland (nos. 68273/14 and 68271/14) (Grand Chamber hearing, 2019-10-09 00:00:00)
Case: CASE OF GESTUR JÓNSSON AND RAGNAR HALLDÓR HALL v. ICELAND
Document type: GRANDCHAMBER
Document date: 2020-12-22 00:00:00
Articles of the Convention concerned: 6, 6-1, 7, 7-1, 35, 35-3-a
Issue: Sections 222(1), 223(1)-(2) of the Criminal Procedure Act no. 88/2008 ; Chapter XXVII of the Civil Procedure Act no. 91/1991

Conclusion: Inadmissible (Art. 35) Admissibility criteria;(Art. 35-3-a) Ratione materiae
Strasbourg case-law cited: A. Menarini Diagnostics S.R.L. v. Italy, no. 43509/08, § 39, 27 September 2011;Balyuk v. Ukraine (dec.), no. 17696/02, 6 September 2005;Blečić v. Croatia [GC], no. 59532/00, § 65, ECHR 2006 III;Correia de Matos v. Portugal [GC], no. 56402/12, § 139, 4 April 2018;Del Río Prada v. Spain [GC], no. 42750/09, § 81, ECHR 2013;Engel and Others v. the Netherlands, 8 June 1976, §§ 82-83, Series A no. 22;Ezeh and Connors v. the United Kingdom [GC], nos. 39665/98 and 40086/98, § 82, ECHR 2003-X;Grande Stevens and Others v. Italy, nos. 18640/10 and 4 others, § 99, 4 March 2014;Ilias and Ahmed v. Hungary [GC], no. 47287/15, §§ 80, 173 and 250, 21 November 2019;Ilnseher v. Germany [GC], nos. 10211/12 and 27505/14, §§ 100 and 203, 4 December 2018;Jussila v. Finland [GC], no. 73053/01, §§ 30-31, ECHR 2006-XIV;Kafkaris v. Cyprus [GC], no. 21906/04, §§ 137-142, ECHR 2008;Kubli v. Switzerland (dec.), no. 50364/99, 21 February 2002;Kyprianou v. Cyprus [GC], no. 73797/01, § 173, ECHR 2005 XIII;Kyprianou v. Cyprus, no. 73797/01, § 31, 27 January 2004;Mamidakis v. Greece, no. 35533/04, § 21, 11 January 2007;Müller-Hartburg v. Austria, no. 47195/06, § 47, 19 February 2013;Öztürk v. Germany, 21 February 1984, § 50, Series A no. 73;Produkcija Plus Storitveno podjetje d.o.o. v. Slovenia, no. 47072/15, §§ 10 and 45, 23 October 2018;Putz v. Austria, 22 February 1996, Reports 1996-I, § 32;Ramos Nunes de Carvalho e Sá v. Portugal [GC], nos. 55391/13 and 2 others, 6 November 2018;Ravnsborg v. Sweden, 23 March 1994, §§ 33-35, Series A no. 283 B;T. v. Austria, no. 27783/95, §§ 63-67, ECHR 2000 XII;Weber v. Switzerland, 22 May 1990, §§ 31 and 34, Series A no. 177;Zaicevs v. Latvia, no. 65022/01, 31 July 2007;Žugić v. Croatia, no. 3699/08, §§ 65-68, 31 May 2011
Hearing: Vistiŋš and Perepjolkins v. Latvia (no. 71243/01) Article 41 - Just satisfaction (Grand Chamber hearing, 2012-01-11 00:00:00)
Case: CASE OF VISTIŅŠ AND PEREPJOLKINS v. LATVIA
Document type: CHAMBER
Document date: 2011-03-08 00:00:00
Articles of the Convention concerned: 14, 14+P1-1, P1-1, P1-1-1
Conclusion: No violation of P1-1;No violation of Art. 14+P1-1
Strasbourg case-law cited: Beyeler v. Italy [GC], no 33202/96, § 112, ECHR 2000-I;Bistrovic v. Croatia, no 25774/05, § 35, 31 May 2007;Broniowski v. Poland [GC], no 31443/96, § 182, ECHR 2004-V;Chassagnou and Others v. France [GC], nos. 25088/94, 28331/95 and 28443/95, § 75, ECHR 1999-III;Efstathiou and Michaïlidis & Cie Motel Amerika v. Greece, no 55794/00, § 29, ECHR 2003-IX;Ex-roi de Greece and Others v. Greece (fond) [GC], no 25701/94, ECHR 2000-XII);Ex-roi de Greece and Others c. Greece (just satisfaction) [GC], no 25701/94, § 78, 28 November 2002;Fener Rum Erkek Lisesi Vakfi v. Turkey, no 34478/97, § 46, ECHR 2007-... (extracts);Guiso-Gallisay v. Italy, no 58858/00, §§ 82-83, 8 December 2005;Hatton and Others v. the United Kingdom [GC], no 36022/97, ECHR 2003-VIII;Jahn and Others v. Germany [GC], nos. 46720/99, 72203/01 and 72552/01, ECHR 2005-VI;James and Others v. the United Kingdom, 21 February 1986, Series A no 98;Jantner v. Slovakia, no 39050/97, § 34, 4 March 2003;Kopecký v. Slovakia [GC], no 44912/98, § 35, ECHR 2004-IX;Kozacioglu c. Turkey [GC], no 2334/03, § 48, ECHR 2009-...;Malama v. Greece, no 43622/98, § 51, ECHR 2001-II;N.A. and Others c. Turkey, no 37451/97, § 39, ECHR 2005-X;Scordino c. Italy (no 1) [GC], no 36813/97, ECHR 2006-V;Serife Yigit v. Turkey [GC], no 3976/05, § 67, ECHR 2010-...;Špacek, s.r.o., v. the Czech Republic, no 26449/95, § 54, 9 November 1999;Sud Fondi S.r.l. and Others v. Italy, no 75909/01, § 109, 20 January 2009;Suljagic v. Bosnia and Herzegovina, no 27912/02, § 42, 3 November 2009;Urbárska Obec Trencianske Biskupice v. Slovakia, no 74258/01, §§ 123-124, ECHR 2007-XIII (extracts);Velikovi and Others v. Bulgaria, nos. 43278/98, 45437/99, 48014/99, 48380/99, 51362/99, 53367/99, 60036/00, 73465/01 and 194/02, § 166, 15 March 2007;Von Maltzan and Others v. Germany (dec.) [GC], nos. 71916/01, 71917/01 and 10260/02, §§ 77 and 111-112, ECHR 2005-V
Hearing: Vistiŋš and Perepjolkins v. Latvia (no. 71243/01) Article 41 - Just satisfaction (Grand Chamber hearing, 2012-01-11 00:00:00)
Case: CASE OF VISTIŅŠ AND PEREPJOLKINS v. LATVIA
Document type: GRANDCHAMBER
Document date: 2014-03-25 00:00:00
Articles of the Convention concerned: 41
Issue: Articles 1757, 1765 and 1763 of the Civil Code
Conclusion: Pecuniary damage - award (Article 41 - Pecuniary damage);Non-pecuniary damage - award (Article 41 - Non-pecuniary damage)
Strasbourg case-law cited: Andrejeva v. Latvia [GC], no. 55707/00, § 115, ECHR 2009;Former King of Greece and Others v. Greece [GC] (just satisfaction), no. 25701/94, §§ 78-79, 28 November 2002;Guiso-Gallisay v. Italy (just satisfaction) [GC], no. 58858/00, 22 December 2009;Iatridis v. Greece (just satisfaction) [GC], no. 31107/96, § 32, ECHR 2000 XI;Medici and Others v. Italy (just satisfaction), no. 70508/01, § 13, 4 December 2012;Scordino v. Italy (no. 1) [GC], no. 36813/97, § 258, ECHR 2006 V
Hearing: Beuze v. Belgium (no. 71409/10) (Grand Chamber hearing, 2017-12-20 00:00:00)
Case: CASE OF BEUZE v. BELGIUM
Document type: GRANDCHAMBER
Document date: 2018-11-09 00:00:00
Articles of the Convention concerned: 6, 6-1, 6-3, 6-3-c, 41
Conclusion: Violation of Article 6 - Right to a fair trial (Article 6 - Criminal proceedings;Article 6-1 - Fair hearing;Article 6-3 - Rights of defence;Article 6-3-c - Defence through legal assistance);Non-pecuniary damage - finding of violation sufficient (Article 41 - Non-pecuniary damage;Just satisfaction)
Strasbourg case-law cited: A.T. v. Luxembourg, no 30460/13, 9 April 2015;Adamkiewicz v. Poland, no 54729/00, §§ 84-87, 2 March 2010;Al Khawaja and Tahery v. Royaume Uni [GC], nos. 26766/05 and 22228/06, §§ 118, and 152-165, ECHR 2011;Blokhin v. Russia [GC], no 47152/06, 23 March 2016;Boz v. Turkey, no 2039/04, § 35, 9 February 2010;Brusco v. France, no 1466/07, § 54, 14 October 2010;Bykov v. Russia [GC], no 4378/02, §§ 94-105, 10 March 2009;Çarkçı v. Turkey (no 2), no 28451/08, §§ 43-46, 14 October 2014;Castellino v. Belgium, no 504/08, §§ 45-47, 25 July 2013;Correia de Matos v. Portugal [GC], no 56402/13, 4 April 2018;Dayanan v. Turkey, no 7377/03, § 33, 13 October 2009;Dvorski v. Croatia [GC], no 25703/11, ECHR 2015;Erkapić v. Croatia, no 51198/08, § 80, 25 April 2013;Galip Doğru v. Turkey, no 36001/06, § 84, 28 April 2015;Hovanesian v. Bulgaria, no 31814/03, § 34, 21 December 2010;Ibrahim and Others v. the United Kingdom [GC], nos. 50541/08 and 3 others, 13 September 2016;John Murray v. the United Kingdom, 8 February 1996, § 66, Reports of Judgments and Decisions 1996-I;Karadağ v. Turkey, no 12976/05, § 47, 29 June 2010;Lanz v. Austria, no 24430/94, § 50, 31 January 2002;Laska and Lika v. Albania, nos. 12315/04 and 17605/04, § 67, 20 April 2010;Lhermitte v. Belgium [GC], no 34238/09, 29 November 2016;M v. the Netherlands, no 2156/10, §§ 82-85, 25 July 2017 (extracts);Mađer v. Croatia, no 56185/07, §§ 151 and 153, 21 June 2011;Moiseyev v. Russia, no 62936/00, §§ 217-218, 9 October 2008;Moreira Ferreira v. Portugal (no 2) [GC], no 19867/12, §§ 94 and 99, 11 July 2017 (extracts);Navone and Others v. Monaco, nos. 62880/11 and 2 others, §§ 73 74, 24 October 2013;Öcalan v. Turkey [GC], no 46221/99, §§ 131-135, ECHR 2005 IV;Rybacki v. Poland, no 52479/99, § 56, 13 January 2009;Sakhnovskiy v. Russia [GC], no 21272/03, §§ 95-97, 2 November 2010;Salduz v. Turkey [GC], no 36391/02, ECHR-2008;Sapan v. Turkey, no 17252/09, § 21, 20 September 2011;Savaş v. Turkey, no 9762/03, § 67, 8 December 2009;Schatschaschwili v. Germany [GC], no 9154/10, ECHR 2015;Schmid-Laffer v. Switzerland, no 41269/08, § 37, 16 June 2015;Šebalj v. Croatia, no 4429/09, §§ 256-257, 28 June 2011;Simeonovi v. Bulgaria [GC], no 21980/04, § 128, 12 May 2017 (extracts);Simons v. Belgium, (dec.), no 71407/10, § 30, 28 August 2012;Taxquet v. Belgium [GC], no 926/05, ECHR 2010;Taxquet v. Belgium, no 926/05, §§ 25-31, 13 January 2009
Hearing: Merabishvili v. Georgia (no. 72508/13) (Grand Chamber hearing, 2017-03-08 00:00:00)
Case: CASE OF MERABISHVILI v. GEORGIA
Document type: CHAMBER
Document date: 2016-06-14 00:00:00
Articles of the Convention concerned: 5, 5-1, 5-1-c, 5-3, 18, 18+5-1, 41
Issue: Articles 194 §§ 1, 2205 § 2 and 206 §§ 1, 8 and 9 of the CPP 
Conclusion: No violation of Article 5 - Right to liberty and security (Article 5-1 - Deprivation of liberty;Lawful arrest or detention);No violation of Article 5 - Right to liberty and security (Article 5-3 - Reasonableness of pre-trial detention);Violation of Article 5 - Right to liberty and security (Article 5-3 - Reasonableness of pre-trial detention);Violation of Article 18+5-1 - Limitation on use of restrictions on rights (Article 18 - Restrictions for unauthorised purposes) (Article 5 - Right to liberty and security;Article 5-1 - Deprivation of liberty;Lawful arrest or detention);Non-pecuniary damage - award (Article 41 - Non-pecuniary damage;Just satisfaction)
Strasbourg case-law cited: Assanidze v. Georgia [GC], no. 71503/01, § 206, ECHR 2004-II;Baranowski v. Poland, no. 28358/95, § 56, ECHR 2000 III;Cebotari v. Moldova, no. 35615/06, § 49, 13 November 2007;Chitayev v. Russia, no. 59334/00, 18 January 2007;G.K. v. Poland, no. 38816/97, § 84, 20 January 2004;Galuashvili v. Georgia, no. 40008/04, § 33-34, 17 July 2008;Ghavtadze v. Georgia, no. 23204/07, §§ 118 and 120, 3 March 2009;Gigolashvili v. Georgia, no. 18145/05, §§ 32-36, 8 July 2008;Giorgi Nikolaishvili v. Georgia, no. 37048/04, 13 January 2009;Gusinskiy v. Russia, no. 70276/01, § 75, ECHR 2004 IV;Ilgar Mammadov v. Azerbaijan, no. 15172/13, §§ 142-143, 22 May 2014;Ječius v. Lithuania, no. 34578/97, §§ 57-64, ECHR 2000 IX;Kharchenko v. Ukraine, no. 40107/02, § 75, 10 February 2011;Khodorkovskiy v. Russia, no. 5829/04, § 257, 31 May 2011;Khudoyorov v. Russia, no. 6847/02, § 125, ECHR 2005 X (extracts);Labita v. Italy [GC], no. 26772/95, § 153, ECHR 2000 IV;Lutsenko v. Ukraine, no. 6492/11, §§ 108-109, 3 July 2012;Mikiashvili v. Georgia, no. 18996/06, §§ 101-102, 9 October 2012;Nikolov v. Bulgaria, no. 38884/97, § 73, 30 January 2003;Panchenko v. Russia, no. 45100/98, § 107, 8 February 2005;Patsuria v. Georgia, no. 30779/04, § 74, 6 November 2007;Ramishvili and Kokhreidze v. Georgia (dec.), no. 1704/06, 27 June 2007;Saghinadze and Others v. Georgia, no. 18768/05, §§ 136-140, 27 May 2010;Smirnova v. Russia, nos. 46133/99 and 48183/99, § 63, ECHR 2003‑IX (extracts);Stašaitis v. Lithuania, no. 47679/99, § 82, 21 March 2002;Tymoshenko v. Ukraine, no. 49872/11, § 267, 30 April 2013