TrustHLT/LaCour huggingface dataset:
Hearing: Armani Da Silva v. the United Kingdom (no. 5878/08) (Grand Chamber hearing, 2015-06-10 00:00:00)
Case: CASE OF ARMANI DA SILVA v. THE UNITED KINGDOM
Document type: GRANDCHAMBER
Document date: 2016-03-30 00:00:00
Articles of the Convention concerned: 2, 2-1, 35
Issue: Offences under the Health and Safety at Work etc. Act 1974



Conclusion: Remainder inadmissible;No violation of Article 2 - Right to life (Article 2-1 - Effective investigation) (Procedural aspect)
Strasbourg case-law cited: A. v. Croatia, no. 55164/08, § 66, 14 October 2010;Akhmadov and Others v. Russia, no. 21586/02, § 101, 14 November 2008;Ali and Ayşe Duran v. Turkey, no. 42942/02, § 66, 8 April 2008;Andronicou and Constantinou v. Cyprus, 9 October 1997, § 192, Reports of Judgments and Decisions 1997 VI;Avşar v. Turkey, no. 25657/94, §§ 393-395, ECHR 2001 VII (extracts);Brecknell v. the United Kingdom, no. 32457/04, 27 November 2007;Caraher v. the United Kingdom (dec.), no. 24520/94, ECHR 2000 I;Enukidze and Girgvliani v. Georgia, no. 25091/07, § 277, 26 April 2011;Ergi v. Turkey, 28 July 1998, § 82, Reports of Judgments and Decisions 1998 IV;Giuliani and Gaggio v. Italy [GC], no. 23458/02, ECHR 2011 (extracts);Golubeva v. Russia, no. 1062/03, § 102, 17 December 2009;Gül v. Turkey, no. 22676/93, §§ 82-89, 14 December 2000;Güleç v. Turkey, 27 July 1998, §§ 81-82, Reports of Judgments and Decisions 1998 IV;Gürtekin and others v. Cyprus (dec.), nos. 60441/13, 68206/13 and 68667/13, 11 March 2014;Hugh Jordan v. the United Kingdom, no. 24746/94, 4 May 2001;İlhan v. Turkey [GC], no. 22277/93, §§ 91-92, ECHR 2000-VII;Jaloud v. the Netherlands [GC], no. 47708/08, § 186, ECHR 2014;Kasap and Others v. Turkey, no. 8656/10, § 59, 14 January 2014;Kaya v. Turkey, 19 February 1998, Reports 1998-I;Kolevi v. Bulgaria, no. 1108/02, § 201, 5 November 2009;Makaratzis v. Greece [GC], no. 50385/99, §§ 65-66, ECHR 2004 XI;Mastromatteo v. Italy [GC], no. 37703/97, §§ 89-90, ECHR 2002 VIII;McCann and Others v. the United Kingdom, 27 September 1995, Series A no. 324;McKerr v. the United Kingdom, no. 28883/95, § 129, ECHR 2001-III;Mileusnić and Mileusnić-Espenheim v. Croatia, no. 66953/09, § 66, 19 February 2015;Mustafa Tunç and Fecire Tunç v. Turkey [GC], no. 24014/05, 14 April 2015;Nachova and Others v. Bulgaria [GC], nos. 43577/98 and 43579/98, § 160, ECHR 2005 VII;Oğur v. Turkey [GC], no. 21594/93, §§ 91-92, ECHR 1999 III;Oláh v. Hungary (dec.), 56558/00, 14 September 2004;Öneryıldız v. Turkey [GC], no. 48939/99, ECHR 2004 XII;Opuz v. Turkey, no. 33401/02, § 150, ECHR 2009;Perk v. Turkey, no. 50739/99, § 60, 28 March 2006;Ramsahai and Others v. the Netherlands [GC], no. 52391/99, ECHR 2007 II;Salman v. Turkey [GC], no. 21986/93, § 106, ECHR 2000-VII;Šilih v. Slovenia [GC], no. 71463/01, 9 April 2009;Suleymanova v. Russia, no. 9191/06, § 85, 12 May 2010;Tanrıkulu v. Turkey [GC], no. 23763/94, § 109, ECHR 1999-IV;Velcea and Mazăre v. Romania, no. 64301/01, 1 December 2009;Wasilewska and Kałucka v. Poland, nos. 28975/04 and 33406/04, § 52, 23 February 2010;Yaşa v. Turkey, 2 September 1998, §§ 102-104, Reports 1998-VI;Zavoloka v. Latvia, no. 58447/00, § 34, 7 July 2009
Hearing: J.K. and Others v. Sweden (no. 59166/12) (Grand Chamber hearing, 2016-02-24 00:00:00)
Case: CASE OF J.K. AND OTHERS v. SWEDEN
Document type: CHAMBER
Document date: 2015-06-04 00:00:00
Articles of the Convention concerned: 3, 35
Conclusion: Remainder inadmissible;No violation of Article 3 - Prohibition of torture (Article 3 - Expulsion) (Conditional) (Iraq)
Strasbourg case-law cited: A. A. M. v. Sweden, no. 68519/10, § 63, 3 April 2014;Abdulaziz, Cabales and Balkandali v. the United Kingdom, 28 May 1985, Series A no. 94, p. 34, § 67;Boujlifa v. France, 21 October 1997, Reports 1997 VI, p. 2264, § 42;Chahal v. the United Kingdom, 15 November 1996, Reports of Judgments and Decisions 1996-V, § 96;Collins and Akaziebie v. Sweden (dec.), no. 23944/05, 8 March 2007;F.H. v. Sweden, no. 32621/06, § 93, 20 January 2009;H.L.R. v. France, 29 April 1997, Reports 1997-III;Hakizimana v. Sweden (dec.), no. 37913/05, 27 March 2008;Hilal v. the United Kingdom, no. 45276/99, § 60, ECHR 2001-II;M.Y.H. and Others v. Sweden, no. 50859/10, § 57, 27 June 2013;Maaouia v. France [GC], no. 39652/98, § 40, ECHR 2000-;Mamatkulov and Askarov v. Turkey [GC], nos. 46827/99 and 46951/99, § 67, ECHR 2005-I;NA. v. the United Kingdom, no. 25904/07, 17 July 2008;Saadi v. Italy [GC], no. 37201/06, ECHR 2008-...;Üner v. the Netherlands [GC], no. 46410/99, § 54, ECHR 2006-XII
External sources: UNHCR position on returns to Iraq of October 2014
Hearing: J.K. and Others v. Sweden (no. 59166/12) (Grand Chamber hearing, 2016-02-24 00:00:00)
Case: CASE OF J.K. AND OTHERS v. SWEDEN
Document type: GRANDCHAMBER
Document date: 2016-08-23 00:00:00
Articles of the Convention concerned: 3, 41
Conclusion: Violation of Article 3 - Prohibition of torture (Article 3 - Expulsion) (Conditional) (Iraq);Pecuniary damage - claim dismissed (Article 41 - Pecuniary damage;Just satisfaction);Non-pecuniary damage - finding of violation sufficient (Article 41 - Non-pecuniary damage;Just satisfaction)
Strasbourg case-law cited: Bahaddar v. the Netherlands, 19 February 1998, § 45, Reports 1998 I;Chahal v. the United Kingdom, 15 November 1996, § 98, Reports 1996-V;Collins and Akaziebie v. Sweden (dec.), no. 23944/05, 8 March 2007;D.N.W. v. Sweden, no. 29946/10, §§ 42 and 45, 6 December 2012;F.G. v. Sweden [GC], no. 43611/11, ECHR 2016;F.H. v. Sweden, no. 32621/06, § 102, 20 January 2009;H.L.R. v. France, 29 April 1997, Reports of Judgments and Decisions 1997 III;Hilal v. the United Kingdom, no. 45276/99, ECHR 2001-II;Hirsi Jamaa and Others v. Italy [GC], no. 27765/09, § 116, ECHR 2012;Labita v. Italy [GC], no. 26772/95, § 119, ECHR 2000 IV;M.A. v. Cyprus, no. 41872/10, § 133, ECHR 2013 (extracts);M.S.S. v. Belgium and Greece [GC], no. 30696/09, § 286, ECHR 2011;Müslim v. Turkey, no. 53566/99, §§ 72-76, 26 April 2005;N. v. Finland, no. 38885/02, §§ 154-155, 26 July 2005;NA. v. the United Kingdom, no. 25904/07, 17 July 2008;Nizamov and Others v. Russia, nos. 22636/13, 24034/13, 24334/13 and 24528/13, § 50, 7 May 2014;R.C. v. Sweden, no. 41827/07, § 55, 9 March 2010;R.J. v. France, no. 10466/11, § 42, 19 September 2013;S.H. v. the United Kingdom, no. 19956/06, §§ 69-71, 15 June 2010;S.H.H. v. the United Kingdom, no. 60367/10, § 71, 29 January 2013;Saadi v. Italy [GC] no. 37201/06, ECHR 2008;Said v. the Netherlands, no. 2345/02, § 49, ECHR 2005 VI;Salah Sheekh v. the Netherlands, no. 1948/04, 11 January 2007;Sufi and Elmi v. the United Kingdom, nos. 8319/07 and 11449/07, 28 June 2011;T.I. v. the United Kingdom (dec.), no. 43844/98, ECHR 2000-III;Venkadajalasarma v. the Netherlands, no. 58510/00, § 63, 17 February 2004
External sources: EU Council Directive 2004/83/EC of 29 April 2004 on minimum standards for the qualification and status of third country nationals or stateless persons as refugees or as persons who otherwise need international protection and the content of the protection granted (as recast by Directive 2011/95/EU of 13 December 2011);UNHCR Note on Burden and Standard of Proof in Refugee Claims;UNHCR Handbook and Guidelines on Procedures and Criteria for Determining Refugee Status
Hearing: V.M. and Others v. Belgium (no. 60125/11) (Grand Chamber hearing, 2016-05-25 00:00:00)
Case: CASE OF V.M. AND OTHERS v. BELGIUM
Document type: CHAMBER
Document date: 2015-07-07 00:00:00
Articles of the Convention concerned: 2, 2-1, 3, 13, 13+3, 35, 35-1, 41
Conclusion: Preliminary objection joined to merits (Article 35-1 - Exhaustion of domestic remedies);Preliminary objection dismissed (Article 35-1 - Exhaustion of domestic remedies);Violation of Article 3 - Prohibition of torture (Article 3 - Degrading treatment) (Substantive aspect);No violation of Article 2 - Right to life (Article 2-1 - Life) (Substantive aspect);Violation of Article 13+3 - Right to an effective remedy (Article 13 - Effective remedy) (Article 3 - Prohibition of torture;Degrading treatment);Pecuniary damage - award (Article 41 - Pecuniary damage;Just satisfaction)
Strasbourg case-law cited: A.C. and Others v. Spain, no 6528/11, 22 April 2014;Budina v. Russia (dec.), no 45603/05, 18 June 2009;Çelik and İmret v. Turkey, no 44093/98, § 57, 26 October 2004;Čonka v. Belgium, no 51564/99, §§ 81-83, ECHR 2002-I;D.P. and J.C. v. the United Kingdom, no 38719/97, § 136, 10 October 2002;De Donder and De Clippel v. Belgium, no  8595/06, §§ 68-69, 6 December 2011;De Souza Ribeiro v. France [GC], no 22689/07, § 83, ECHR 2012;El-Masri v. the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia [GC], no 39630/09, § 202, ECHR 2012;F.H. v. Greece, no 78456/11, §§ 107-111, 31 July 2014;Gebremedhin [Gaberamadhien] v. France, no 25389/05, ECHR 2007 V;Hirsi Jamaa and Others v. Italy [GC], no 27765/09, ECHR 2012;I.M. v. France, no 9152/09, 2 February 2012;Kanagaratnam v. Belgium, no 15297/09, § 62, 13 December 2011;Keenan v. the United Kingdom, no 27229/95, §§ 89-90, ECHR 2001 III;Labita v. Italy [GC], no 26772/95, § 119, ECHR 2000-IV;M.S.S. v. Belgium and Greece [GC], no 30696/09, ECHR 2011;Muskhadzhiyeva and Others v. Belgium, no 41442/07, §§ 55 and 63, 19 January 2010;Müslim v. Turkey, no 53566/99, § 85, 26 April 2005;Nencheva and Others v. Bulgaria, no 48609/06, §§ 105 and 108, 18 June 2013;Nuri Kurt v. Turkey, no 37038/97, § 116, 29 November 2005;Popov v. France, nos. 39472/07 and 39474/07, § 91, 19 January 2012;R.U. v. Greece, no 2237/08, § 77, 7 June 2011;S.H.H. v. the United Kingdom, no 60367/10, § 90, 29 January 2013;Salah Sheekh v. the Netherlands, no 1948/04, § 136, 11 January 2007;Sharifi and Others v. Italy and Greece, no 16643/09, §§ 138-139, 21 October 2014;Singh and Others v. Belgium, no 33210/11, 2 October 2012;Soering v. the United Kingdom, 7 July 1989, § 90, Series A no 161;Sufi and Elmi v. the United Kingdom, nos. 8319/07 and 11449/07, § 283, 28 June 2011;Svinarenko and Slyadnev v. Russia [GC], nos. 32541/08 and 43441/08, §§ 114-115, 17 July 2014;Tarakhel v. Switzerland [GC], no 29217/12, ECHR 2014 (extracts);Üner v. the Netherlands [GC], no 46410/99, § 54, ECHR 2006 XII;Yoh-Ekale Mwanje v. Belgium, no 10486/10, § 106, 20 December 2011
Hearing: V.M. and Others v. Belgium (no. 60125/11) (Grand Chamber hearing, 2016-05-25 00:00:00)
Case: CASE OF V.M. AND OTHERS v. BELGIUM
Document type: GRANDCHAMBER
Document date: 2016-11-17 00:00:00
Articles of the Convention concerned: 37, 37-1, 37-1-c
Conclusion: Struck out of the list (Article 37-1 - Striking out applications;Article 37-1-c - Continued examination not justified)
Strasbourg case-law cited: Ali v. Switzerland, 5 August 1998, § 32, Reports of Judgments and Decisions 1998 V;Diallo v. the Czech Republic, no. 20493/07, §§ 44-47, 23 June 2011;Ibrahim Hayd v. the Netherlands (dec.), no. 30880/10, § 10, 29 November 2011;K. and T. v. Finland [GC], no. 25702/94, § 140, ECHR 2001 VII;Kadzoev v. Bulgaria (dec.), no. 56437/07, § 7, 1 October 2013;M.H. and Others v. Cyprus (dec.), no. 41744/10, § 14, 14 January 2014;M.Is. v. Cyprus (dec.), no. 41805/10, § 20, 10 February 2015;Ramzy v. the Netherlands (striking out), no. 25424/05, § 64, 20 July 2010;Sharifi and Others v. Italy and Greece, no. 16643/09, 21 October 2014
Hearing: Khamtokhu and Aksenchik v. Russia (nos. 60367/08 and 961/11) (Grand Chamber hearing, 2016-04-20 00:00:00)
Case: KHAMTOKHU v. RUSSIA AND OTHER APPLICATIONS
Document type: DECISIONS
Articles of the Convention concerned: 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 13, 14, 17
Conclusion: Partly inadmissible
Hearing: Khamtokhu and Aksenchik v. Russia (nos. 60367/08 and 961/11) (Grand Chamber hearing, 2016-04-20 00:00:00)
Case: KHAMTOKHU AND AKSENCHIK v. RUSSIA
Document type: DECISIONS
Articles of the Convention concerned: 5, 5-1, 14, 14+5, 35
Issue: Article 57 of the Russian Criminal Code
Conclusion: Partly admissible;Partly inadmissible (Art. 35) Admissibility criteria
Hearing: S.M. v. Croatia (no. 60561/14) (Grand Chamber hearing, 2019-05-15 00:00:00)
Case: S.M. v. CROATIA
Document type: COMMUNICATEDCASES
Articles of the Convention concerned: 3, 4, 4-1, 8, 8-1
Conclusion: Communicated
Hearing: S.M. v. Croatia (no. 60561/14) (Grand Chamber hearing, 2019-05-15 00:00:00)
Case: CASE OF S.M. v. CROATIA
Document type: CHAMBER
Document date: 2018-07-19 00:00:00
Articles of the Convention concerned: 4, 4-1, 41
Issue: Articles 106, 157, 175 and 195 of the Criminal Code ; Articles 2, 9, 16, 38, 43, 45, 47, 438 and 449 of the Code of Criminal Procedure

Conclusion: Violation of Article 4 - Prohibition of slavery and forced labour (Article 4 - Positive obligations;Effective investigation;Article 4-1 - Trafficking in human beings);Non-pecuniary damage - award (Article 41 - Non-pecuniary damage;Just satisfaction)
Strasbourg case-law cited: Ali and Ayşe Duran v. Turkey, no 42942/02, 8 April 2008;Baştürk v. Turkey, no. 49742/09, § 26, 28 April 2015;Beganović v. Croatia, no. 46423/06, § 77, 25 June 2009;C.N. and V. v. France, no. 67724/09, § 105, 11 October 2012;C.N. v. the United Kingdom, no. 4239/08, 13 November 2012;Chowdury and Others v. Greece, no. 21884/15, ECHR 2017;J. and Others v. Austria, no. 58216/12, § 104, ECHR 2017 (extracts);L.E. v. Greece, no. 71545/12, 21 January 2016;M.C. v. Bulgaria, no. 39272/98, § 150, ECHR 2003 XII;Okkalı v. Turkey, no. 52067/99, § 66, ECHR 2006 XII (extracts);Rantsev v. Cyprus and Russia, no. 25965/04, ECHR 2010 (extracts);Siliadin v. France, no. 73316/01, ECHR 2005 VII;X and Y v. the Netherlands, 26 March 1985, § 27, Series A no 91
External sources: Convention for the Suppression of the Traffic in Persons and the Exploitation of the Prostitution of Others, adopted on 2 December 1949, entered into force on 25 July 1951 and ratified by Croatia on 12 October 1992;Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (“the CEDAW”) adopted in 1979 by the UN General Assembly and ratified by Croatia on 9 September 1992;Protocol to Prevent, Suppress and Punish Trafficking in Persons, especially Women and Children (“the Palermo Protocol”), supplementing the United Nations Convention against Transnational Organised Crime 2000, signed by Croatia on 12 December 2000 and ratified on 24 January 2003;Declaration on the Elimination of Violence against Women, adopted at the United Nations General Assembly plenary meeting on 20 December 1993;Council of Europe Convention on Action against Trafficking in Human Beings, adopted on 16 May 2005, entered into force on 1 February 2008 and ratified by Croatia on 5 September 2007
Hearing: Ališić and Others v. Bosnia and Herzegovina, Croatia, Serbia, Slovenia and “the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia” (no. 60642/08) (Grand Chamber hearing, 2013-07-10 00:00:00)
Case: ALISIC AND OTHERS v. BOSNIA AND HERZEGOVINA, CROATIA, SERBIA, SLOVENIA AND "THE FORMER YUGOSLAV REPUBLIC OF MACEDONIA"
Document type: COMMUNICATEDCASES
Document date: 2010-02-23 00:00:00
Articles of the Convention concerned: 13, 14, P1-1, P1-1-1
Conclusion: Communicated
Hearing: Ališić and Others v. Bosnia and Herzegovina, Croatia, Serbia, Slovenia and “the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia” (no. 60642/08) (Grand Chamber hearing, 2013-07-10 00:00:00)
Case: CASE OF ALIŠIĆ AND OTHERS v. BOSNIA AND HERZEGOVINA, CROATIA, SERBIA, SLOVENIA AND "THE FORMER YUGOSLAV REPUBLIC OF MACEDONIA"
Document type: CHAMBER
Document date: 2012-11-06 00:00:00
Articles of the Convention concerned: 13, 35, 35-1, 41, 46, P1-1, P1-1-1
Issue: Agreement on Succession Issues ; Section 24 of the Constitutional Court Act 2007
Conclusion: Preliminary objection dismissed (Article 35-1 - Exhaustion of domestic remedies);Remainder inadmissible;Violation of Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 - Protection of property (Article 1 para. 1 of Protocol No. 1 - Peaceful enjoyment of possessions) (Serbia);Violation of Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 - Protection of property (Article 1 para. 1 of Protocol No. 1 - Peaceful enjoyment of possessions) (Slovenia);No violation of Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 - Protection of property (Article 1 para. 1 of Protocol No. 1 - Peaceful enjoyment of possessions) (Bosnia and Herzegovina) (Croatia) (the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia);Violation of Article 13 - Right to an effective remedy (Article 13 - Effective remedy) (Serbia);Violation of Article 13 - Right to an effective remedy (Article 13 - Effective remedy) (Slovenia);No violation of Article 13 - Right to an effective remedy (Article 13 - Effective remedy) (Bosnia and Herzegovina) (Croatia) (the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia);Respondent State to take measures of a general character (Article 46 - Pilot judgment;Systemic problem;General measures);Respondent State to take measures of a general character (Article 46 - Pilot judgment;Systemic problem;General measures);Non-pecuniary damage - award
Strasbourg case-law cited: Babylonová v. Slovakia, no. 69146/01, § 44, ECHR 2006-VIII;Baumann v. France, no. 33592/96, § 47, ECHR 2001-V;Broniowski v. Poland [GC], no. 31443/96, §§ 189-94, ECHR 2004-V;Burdov v. Russia (no. 2), no. 33509/04, § 127, ECHR 2009;Demopoulos and Others v. Turkey (dec.) [GC], nos. 46113/99, 3843/02, 13751/02, 13466/03, 10200/04, 14163/04, 19993/04 and 21819/04, § 98, ECHR 2010;E.G. v. Poland (dec.), no. 50425/99, § 28, ECHR 2008;Iatridis v. Greece [GC], no. 31107/96, § 55, ECHR 1999-II;Immobiliare Saffi v. Italy [GC], no. 22774/93, § 69, ECHR 1999-V;Kovacic and Others v. Slovenia [GC], nos. 44574/98, 45133/98 and 48316/99, § 265, 3 October 2008;Kudla v. Poland [GC], no. 30210/96, § 157, ECHR 2000-XI;Lukenda v. Slovenia, no. 23032/02, § 94, ECHR 2005-X;Mykhaylenky and Others v. Ukraine, nos. 35091/02 et al., § 43-45, ECHR 2004-XII;R. Kacapor and Others v. Serbia, nos. 2269/06 et al., §§ 97-98, 15 January 2008;Raškovic and Milunovic v. Serbia, nos. 1789/07 and 28058/07, § 71, 31 May 2011;Šekerovic v. Serbia (dec.), no. 32472/03, 4 January 2006;Suljagic v. Bosnia and Herzegovina, no. 27912/02, 3 November 2009;Trajkovski v. the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia (dec.), no. 53320/99, ECHR 2002-IV;Wolkenberg and Others v. Poland (dec.), no. 50003/99, § 34, ECHR 2007-XIV
Hearing: Z.A. and Others v. Russia (nos. 61411/15, 61420/15, 61427/15 and 3028/16) (Grand Chamber hearing, 2018-04-18 00:00:00)
Case: A.M. v. RUSSIA
Document type: COMMUNICATEDCASES
Articles of the Convention concerned: 3, 5, 5-1-b
Conclusion: Communicated
Hearing: Z.A. and Others v. Russia (nos. 61411/15, 61420/15, 61427/15 and 3028/16) (Grand Chamber hearing, 2018-04-18 00:00:00)
Case: M.B. v. RUSSIA
Document type: COMMUNICATEDCASES
Articles of the Convention concerned: 3, 5, 5-1
Conclusion: Communicated
Hearing: Z.A. and Others v. Russia (nos. 61411/15, 61420/15, 61427/15 and 3028/16) (Grand Chamber hearing, 2018-04-18 00:00:00)
Case: Z.A. v. RUSSIA
Document type: COMMUNICATEDCASES
Articles of the Convention concerned: 3, 5, 5-1
Conclusion: Communicated
Hearing: Z.A. and Others v. Russia (nos. 61411/15, 61420/15, 61427/15 and 3028/16) (Grand Chamber hearing, 2018-04-18 00:00:00)
Case: YASIEN v. RUSSIA
Document type: COMMUNICATEDCASES
Articles of the Convention concerned: 3
Conclusion: Communicated
Hearing: Z.A. and Others v. Russia (nos. 61411/15, 61420/15, 61427/15 and 3028/16) (Grand Chamber hearing, 2018-04-18 00:00:00)
Case: CASE OF Z.A. AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA
Document type: CHAMBER
Document date: 2017-03-28 00:00:00
Articles of the Convention concerned: 3, 5, 5-1, 5-1-f, 41, 46, 46-2
Conclusion: Violation of Article 5 - Right to liberty and security (Article 5-1 - Deprivation of liberty;Lawful arrest or detention;Article 5-1-f - Prevent unauthorised entry into country);Violation of Article 3 - Prohibition of torture (Article 3 - Degrading treatment;Inhuman treatment) (Substantive aspect);Non-pecuniary damage - award (Article 41 - Non-pecuniary damage;Just satisfaction)
Strasbourg case-law cited: Abou Amer v. Romania, no. 14521/03, § 37, 24 May 2011;Amuur v. France, 25 June 1996, §§ 43-52, Reports of Judgments and Decisions 1996 III;Ananyev and Others v. Russia, nos. 42525/07 and 60800/08, §§ 121-123, 10 January 2012;Austin and Others v. the United Kingdom [GC], nos. 39692/09 and 2 others, § 58, ECHR 2012;El-Masri v. the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia [GC], no. 39630/09, § 230, ECHR 2012;M.S.S. v. Belgium and Greece [GC], no. 30696/09, §§ 216-218, ECHR 2011;Mahdid and Addar v. Austria (dec.), no. 74762/01, 8 December 2005;Mogoş v. Romania (dec.), no. 20420/02, 6 May 2004;Muršić v. Croatia [GC], no. 7334/13, §§ 96-97, 20 October 2016;Nolan and K. v. Russia, no. 2512/04, § 93, 12 February 2009;Peers v. Greece, no. 28524/95, § 74, ECHR 2001 III;Riad and Idiab v. Belgium, nos. 29787/03 and 29810/03, 24 January 2008;Shamsa v. Poland (dec.), nos. 45355/99 and 45357/99, 5 December 2002
External sources: United Nations Convention relating to the Status of Refugees 1951;Chapter 5 of Annex 9 to the Chicago Convention on International Civil Aviation 2015
Hearing: Bărbulescu v. Romania (no. 61496/08) (Grand Chamber hearing, 2016-11-30 00:00:00)
Case: BARBULESCU v. ROMANIA
Document type: COMMUNICATEDCASES
Document date: 2012-12-18 00:00:00
Articles of the Convention concerned: 8, 8-1
Conclusion: Communicated
Hearing: Bărbulescu v. Romania (no. 61496/08) (Grand Chamber hearing, 2016-11-30 00:00:00)
Case: CASE OF BĂRBULESCU v. ROMANIA
Document type: CHAMBER
Document date: 2016-01-12 00:00:00
Articles of the Convention concerned: 8, 8-1, 35
Conclusion: Remainder inadmissible;No violation of Article 8 - Right to respect for private and family life (Article 8 - Positive obligations;Article 8-1 - Respect for correspondence;Respect for private life)
Strasbourg case-law cited: Amann v. Switzerland [GC], no. 27798/95, § 43, ECHR 2000 II;Benediksdóttir v. Iceland (dec.), no. 38079/06, 16 June 2009;Bohlen v. Germany, no. 53495/09, § 45, 19 February 2015;Botta v. Italy, 24 February 1998, § 35, Reports of Judgments and Decisions 1998 I;Copland v. the United Kingdom, no. 62617/00, § 41, ECHR 2007 I;E.B. v. France [GC], no. 43546/02, § 43, 22 January 2008;Evans v. the United Kingdom [GC], no. 6339/05, §§ 75 and 77, ECHR 2007 I;Fernández Martínez v. Spain [GC], no. 56030/07, § 126, ECHR 2014 (extracts);García Ruiz v. Spain [GC], no. 30544/96, §§ 28-29, ECHR 1999 I;Halford v. the United Kingdom, 25 June 1997, §§ 44-45, Reports of Judgments and Decisions 1997 III;Jeunesse v. the Netherlands [GC], no. 12738/10, § 106, 3 October 2014;Köpke v. Germany (dec.), no. 420/07, 5 October 2010;Niemietz v. Germany, 16 December 1992, § 29, Series A no. 251 B;Oleksandr Volkov v. Ukraine, no. 21722/11, ECHR 2013;Pay v. the United Kingdom (dec.), no. 32792/05, 16 September 2008;Peev v. Bulgaria, no. 64209/01, 26 July 2007;Von Hannover v. Germany (no. 2) [GC], nos. 40660/08 and 60641/08, § 57, ECHR 2012;Wieser and Bicos Beteiligungen GmbH v. Austria, no. 74336/01, §§ 59 and 63, ECHR 2007 IV;Yuditskaya and Others v. Russia, no. 5678/06, § 30, 12 February 2015
Hearing: Denis and Irvine v. Belgium (nos. 62819/17 and 63921/17) (Grand Chamber hearing, 2020-10-21 00:00:00)
Case: CASE OF DENIS AND IRVINE v. BELGIUM
Document type: CHAMBER
Document date: 2019-10-08 00:00:00
Articles of the Convention concerned: 5, 5-1, 5-4
Conclusion: No violation of Article 5 - Right to liberty and security (Article 5-1 - Lawful arrest or detention);No violation of Article 5 - Right to liberty and security (Article 5-4 - Review of lawfulness of detention)
Hearing: Kurt v. Austria (no. 62903/15) (Grand Chamber hearing, 2020-06-17 00:00:00)
Case: KURT v. AUSTRIA
Document type: COMMUNICATEDCASES
Articles of the Convention concerned: 2, 2-1, 3, 8, 8-1
Conclusion: Communicated