Source: https://www.johndeasytd.com/daacuteil-qs-2013/european-court-of-human-rights-decisions-based-on-irish-rulings
Timestamp: 2019-01-16 06:10:46
Document Index: 254690068

Matched Legal Cases: ['HUDOC ', 'application no 69558', 'application no 8428', 'application no 53743', 'application no 23213', 'application no 35810', 'application no 24643', 'application no 43838', 'application nos 50254', 'application no 37868', 'application no 7812', 'application no 61138', 'application no 9519', 'application no 8596', 'application no 25579', 'application no 41130', 'application no 31333', 'application no 56588', 'application no 14079', 'application no 23663', 'application no 23662', 'application no 26499', 'application no 18273', 'application no 2453', 'application no 45036', 'application no 55120', 'application no 54725', 'application no 42297', 'application no 21826', 'application no 50389', 'application no 44179', 'application no 52787', 'application no 39474', 'application no 31253', 'application no 33267', 'application no 36887', 'application no 34720', 'application no 41957', 'application no 41525', 'application no 41382', 'application no 16969', 'application nos 14234', 'application no 12742', 'application no 10581', 'application no 9697', 'application no 332']

European Court of Human Rights decisions based on Irish rulings - John Deasy T.D.
There are 18 judgments of the European Court of Human Rights finding a violation of the Convention with respect to one or more aspects of the application which refer to rulings of the Irish Supreme Court.
Domestically, implementation of Court judgments is primarily a matter for the lead Minister to take forward but I have endeavoured to provide the Deputy with information on steps taken to implement judgments against the State.
The implementation of judgments of the European Court of Human Rights is supervised by the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe.
In relation to pending judgments against the State, information on their current status (including information submitted by the State) is available on the website of the Department of Execution of Judgments of the European Court of Human Rights at: www.coe.int/t/dghl/monitoring/execution/default_EN.asp
Committee of Ministers’ Resolutions terminating its supervision of judgments which have been fully implemented and setting out the steps taken to implement the judgment are available via the HUDOC database located on the website of the European Court of Human Rights at: www.echr.coe.int/Pages/home.aspx?p=caselaw/HUDOC&c=#n1355308215921_pointer
List of judgments and decisions of the European Court of Human Rights referring to rulings of the Irish Supreme Court:
Courtney v Ireland, application no 69558/10, decision, 18 December 2012 (inadmissible);
Boyce v Ireland, application no 8428/09, decision, 27 November 2012 (inadmissible);
Magee v Ireland, application no 53743/09, decision, 20 November 2012 (friendly settlement);
McDermott and others v Ireland and Keegan v Ireland, application no 23213/09 and 62652/09, decision, 25 September 2012 (inadmissible);
O’Keeffe v Ireland, application no 35810/09, decision, 26 June 2012 (partly friendly settlement and partly pending);
C v Ireland, application no 24643/08, judgment, 1 March 2012 (violation);
The finding of a violation related to delays in criminal proceedings. Implementation of this judgment is ongoing and is related to the judgment in Mc Farlane v Ireland (see below).
O v Ireland, application no 43838/07, judgment, 19 January 2012 (violation);
The finding of a violation related to delays in criminal proceedings. Implementation of this judgment is ongoing and is related to the judgment in Mc Farlane v Ireland (below).
Birney v Ireland and Troy and Brennan v Ireland, application nos 50254/08 and 52079/08, decision, 10 January 2012 (inadmissible);
TH v Ireland, application no 37868/06, judgment, 8 December 2011 (violation);
The finding of violations related to delays in criminal proceedings and the lack of an effective domestic remedy regarding such delays. Implementation of this judgment is ongoing and is related to the judgment in Mc Farlane v Ireland (below).
Superwood Holdings PLC and Others v Ireland, application no 7812/04, judgment, 8 September 2011 (violation);
The finding of a violation related to delays in civil proceedings. There are no outstanding measures required. Implementation of the judgment was related to implementation of previous similar judgments (see Barry v Ireland, Doran v Ireland, Mc Mullen v Ireland and O’Reilly v Ireland, below).
Enright v Ireland, application no 61138/08, decision, 21 June 2011 (friendly settlement);
JB v Ireland, application no 9519/07, decision, 21 June 2011 (friendly settlement);
Adio v Ireland, application no 8596/08, decision, 17 May 2011 (inadmissible);
A, B and C v Ireland, judgment, application no 25579/05, judgment, 16 December 2010 (violation);
The finding of a violation related to the lack of an accessible and effective procedure to enable Ms C to establish whether she qualified for a lawful termination of pregnancy in accordance with Irish law. Implementation of this judgment is ongoing.
Kelly v Ireland, application no 41130/06, decision 14 December 2010 (inadmissible);
Mc Farlane v Ireland, application no 31333/06, judgment, 10 September 2010 (violation);
The finding of violations related to delays in criminal proceedings and the lack of an effective domestic remedy regarding such delays. Implementation of this judgment is ongoing.
Stapleton v Ireland, application no 56588/07, decision, 4 May 2010 (inadmissible);
X v Ireland, application no 14079/04, decision, 15 December 2009 (inadmissible);
Boyce v Ireland, application no 23663/06, decision, 6 May 2008 (friendly settlement);
Delaney v Ireland, application no 23662/06, decision, 29 November 2007 (friendly settlement);
D v Ireland, application no 26499/02, decision, 28 June 2006 (inadmissible);
Barry v Ireland, application no 18273/04, judgment, 15 December 2005 (violation);
The finding of violations related to delays in criminal proceedings and the lack of an effective domestic remedy regarding such delays. There are no outstanding measures required. The judgment was implemented by way of legislative and administrative changes in practice and procedure.
Panevskii and Others v Ireland, application no 2453/03, decision, 13 October 2005 (inadmissible);
Bosphorous Hava Yollari Turizm Ve Ticaret Anonim Sirketi v Ireland, application no 45036/98, judgment, 30 June 2005 (no violation);
Independent News and Media and Independent Newspapers Ireland Limited v Ireland, application no 55120/00, judgment, 16 June 2005 (no violation);
O’Reilly and Others v Ireland, application no 54725/00, judgment, 29 July 2004 (violation);
The finding of violations related to delays in civil proceedings and the lack of an effective domestic remedy regarding such delays. There are no outstanding measures required. The judgment was implemented by way of legislative and administrative changes in practice and procedure.
Mc Mullen v Ireland, application no 42297/98, judgment, 29 July 2004, (violation);
The finding of a violation related to delays in civil proceedings. There are no outstanding measures required. The judgment was implemented by way of legislative and administrative changes in practice and procedure.
Dawson v Ireland, application no 21826/02, decision, 8 July 2004 (inadmissible);
Doran v Ireland, application no 50389/99, judgment, 31 July 2003 (violation);
The finding of violations related to delays in civil proceedings and the lack of an effective domestic remedy regarding such delays.. There are no outstanding measures required. The judgment was implemented by way of legislative and administrative changes in practice and procedure.
Murphy v Ireland, application no 44179/98, judgment, 10 July 2003 (no violation);
Nee v Ireland, application no 52787/99, decision, 30 January 2003 (inadmissible);
DG v Ireland, application no 39474/98, judgment, 16 May 2002 (violation);
The finding of a violation related to the right to liberty by the placing of an individual with a severe personality disorder in a penal institution. Implementation of the judgment is ongoing.
Mc Elhinny v Ireland, application no 31253/96, judgment 21 November 2001 (no violation);
Croke v Ireland, application no 33267/96, judgment, 21 December 2000 (friendly settlement);
Quinn v Ireland, application no 36887/97, judgment, 21 December 2000 (violation);
The finding of a violation related to the right to silence. There are no outstanding measures required. The judgment was implemented by way of legislative and administrative changes in practice and procedure.
Heaney and McGuinness v Ireland, application no 34720/97, judgment, 21 December 2000 (violation);
Barry v Ireland, application no 41957/98, decision, 6 July 2000 (inadmissible);
Rock v Ireland, application no 41525/98, decision, 11 May 2000 (inadmissible);
Dempsey v Ireland, application no 41382/98, decision, 6 April 2000 (inadmissible);
Keegan v Ireland, application no 16969/90, judgment, 26 May 1994 (violation);
The finding of a violation related to the right to family life. There are no outstanding measures required. The judgment was implemented primarily by way of legislative change in particular, the Adoption Act 1988 provided a legally protected right to natural fathers to be consulted in matters of adoption of their children.
Open Door and Dublin Well Woman v Ireland, application nos 14234/88 and 14235/88, judgment, 29 October 1992 (violation);
The finding of a violation related to freedom of expression and the provision of information about abortion services in the United Kingdom. There are no outstanding measures required. The judgment was implemented by way of legislative change, in particular, the Regulation of Information (Services outside the State for Termination of Pregnancies) Act 1995 and the Thirteenth Amendment of the Constitution Act 1992.
Pine Valley Developments Ltd and Others v Ireland, application no 12742/87, judgment, 29 November 1991 (violation);
The finding of a violation related to the prohibition of discrimination in the enjoyment of property rights. There are no outstanding measures required. The judgment was implemented by payment of just satisfaction (ie monetary compensation) as directed by the European Court of Human Rights.
Norris v Ireland, application no 10581/83, judgment, 26 October 1988, (violation);
The finding of a violation related to an interference with the right to private life resulting from legislation prohibiting male homosexual activity. There are no outstanding measures required. The judgment was implemented by legislative change, the Criminal Law (Sexual Offences) Act 1993.
Johnston and Others v Ireland, application no 9697/82, judgment, 18 December 1986, (violation);
The finding of a violation related the right to respect for family life in the context of children born outside marriage. There are no outstanding measures required. The judgment was implemented by legislative change, the Status of Children Act 1987.
Lawless v Ireland (No 3), application no 332/57, judgment, 1 July 1961, (no violation).