taltwi/LaCour huggingface dataset:
CASE OF DEL RÍO PRADA v. SPAIN
Hearing: Del Rio Prada v. Spain (no. 42750/09 ) (Grand Chamber hearing, 2013-03-20 00:00:00)
Application no.: 42750/09
Document type: CHAMBER
Document date: 2012-07-10 00:00:00
ECLI: ECLI:CE:ECHR:2012:0710JUD004275009
Respondent state: ESP
Articles of the Convention: 5;5-1;7;7-1;35;35-3;41;46;46-2
Judges: Alvina Gyulumyan;Corneliu Bîrsan;Egbert Myjer;Ján Šikuta;Josep Casadevall;Luis López Guerra;Nona Tsotsoria
Represented by: ROUGET D. ;  ARAMENDIA I.
Issue: Article 988 of the Code of Criminal Procedure ; Articles 70 § 2 and 100 of the Criminal Code of 1973 ; Article 78 of the Criminal Code of 1995 ; Article 59 of the Prison Rules of 1981
Strasbourg case-law cited: Achour v. France [GC], no 67335/01, § 44, ECHR 2006-IV;Aleksanyan v. Russia, no 46468/06, §§ 239-240, 22 December 2008;Amuur v. France, 25 June 1996, § 50, Reports of Judgments and Decisions 1996-III;Assanidze v. Georgia [GC], no 71503/01, §§ 202-203, ECHR 2004-II;Bozano v. France, judgment of 18 December 1986, § 54, Series A no 111;Broniowski v. Poland [GC], no 31443/96, § 194, ECHR 2004-V;Cantoni v. France, 15 November 1996, Reports of Judgments and Decisions 1996-V;Çelikkaya v. Turkey (dec.), no 34026/03, 1er June 2010;Coëme and Others v. Belgium, nos. 32492/96, 32547/96, 32548/96, 33209/96 and 33210/96, § 145, ECHR 2000-VII;Fatullayev v. Azerbaijan, no 40984/07, §§ 176-177, 22 April 2010;Garagin v. Italy (dec.), no 33290/07, 29 April 2008;Grava v. Italy, no 43522/98, 10 July 2003;Gurguchiani v. Spain, no 16012/06, 15 December 2009;Hosein v. the United Kingdom, no 26293/95, Commission Decision of 28 February 1996;Irfan Kalan v. Turkey (dec.), no 73561/01, 2 October 2001;Jamil v. France, 8 June 1995, §§ 30-31, Series A no 317-B;Kafkaris v. Cyprus [GC], no 21906/04, ECHR 2008-...;Kokkinakis v. Greece, 25 May 1993, Series A no 260-A;M. v. Germany, no 19359/04, ECHR 2009;Oshurko v. Ukraine, no 33108/05, § 98, 8 September 2011;Pilla v. Italy, no 64088/00, § 41, 2 March 2006;S.W. v. the United Kingdom, 22 November 1995, §§ 35-36, Series A no 335-B;Scoppola v. Italy (no 2) [GC], no 10249/03, 17 September 2009;Scozzari and Giunta v. Italy [GC], nos. 39221/98 and 41963/98, § 249, ECHR 2000-VIII;Stafford v. the United Kingdom [GC], no 46295/99, § 64, ECHR 2002-IV;Streletz, Kessler and Krenz v. Germany [GC], nos. 34044/96, 35532/97 and 44801/98, § 50, ECHR 2001-II;Weeks v. the United Kingdom, judgment of 2 March 1987, § 42, Series A no 114;Welch v. the United Kingdom, 9 February 1995, §§ 27-28, Series A no 307-A
Conclusion: Preliminary objection joined to merits and dismissed (Article 35-3 - Ratione materiae);Remainder inadmissible;Violation of Article 7 - No punishment without law (Article 7-1 - Heavier penalty;Nulla poena sine lege;Retroactivity);Violation of Article 5 - Right to liberty and security (Article 5-1 - Lawful arrest or detention);Respondent State to take individual measures (Article 46-2 - Individual measures);Non-pecuniary damage - award
Separate opinion: FALSE
O'KEEFFE v. IRELAND
Hearing: O’Keeffe v. Ireland (no. 35810/09) (Grand Chamber hearing, 2013-03-06 00:00:00)
Application no.: 35810/09
Document type: COMMUNICATEDCASES
Document date: 2011-04-05 00:00:00
Respondent state: IRL
Articles of the Convention: 3;6;8;13;13+3;13+6;14;14+3;14+8;14+P1-2;P1-2
Represented by: CANTILLON ERNEST
Conclusion: Communicated
Separate opinion: FALSE
O'KEEFFE v. IRELAND
Hearing: O’Keeffe v. Ireland (no. 35810/09) (Grand Chamber hearing, 2013-03-06 00:00:00)
Application no.: 35810/09
Document type: DECISIONS
ECLI: ECLI:CE:ECHR:2012:0626DEC003581009
Respondent state: IRL
Articles of the Convention: 3;6;8;13;13+3;13+6;14;14+8;14+P1-2;35;37;37-1;P1-2
Judges: André Potocki;Dean Spielmann;Ganna Yudkivska;Karel Jungwiert;Mark Villiger
Represented by: CANTILLON E. J. AND CO.
Conclusion: Partly struck out of the list;Partly admissible
JANOWIEC AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA
Hearing: Janowiec and Others v. Russia (nos. 55508/07 and 29520/09) (Grand Chamber hearing, 2013-02-13 00:00:00)
Application no.: 55508/07
Document type: DECISIONS
ECLI: ECLI:CE:ECHR:2011:0705DEC005550807
Respondent state: RUS
Articles of the Convention: 2;3;6;8;13
Judges: Anatoly Kovler;Angelika Nußberger;Dean Spielmann;Isabelle Berro-Lefèvre;Karel Jungwiert;Mark Villiger
Represented by: SZEWCZYK J.
Conclusion: Partly admissible;Partly inadmissible
JANOWIEC AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA
Hearing: Janowiec and Others v. Russia (nos. 55508/07 and 29520/09) (Grand Chamber hearing, 2013-02-13 00:00:00)
Application no.: 29520/09
Document type: DECISIONS
ECLI: ECLI:CE:ECHR:2011:0705DEC005550807
Respondent state: RUS
Articles of the Convention: 2;3;6;8;13
Judges: Anatoly Kovler;Angelika Nußberger;Dean Spielmann;Isabelle Berro-Lefèvre;Karel Jungwiert;Mark Villiger
Represented by: SZEWCZYK J.
Conclusion: Partly admissible;Partly inadmissible
CASE OF FERNÁNDEZ MARTÍNEZ v. SPAIN
Hearing: Fernandez Martinez v. Spain (no. 56030/07) (Grand Chamber hearing, 2013-01-30 00:00:00)
Application no.: 56030/07
Document type: GRANDCHAMBER
Document date: 2014-06-12 00:00:00
ECLI: ECLI:CE:ECHR:2014:0612JUD005603007
Respondent state: ESP
Articles of the Convention: 8;8-1;8-2;9;9-1;10;10-1;11;11-1
Judges: Alejandro Saiz Arnaiz;Alvina Gyulumyan;András Sajó;André Potocki;Angelika Nußberger;Ann Power-Forde;Corneliu Bîrsan;Dean Spielmann;Dmitry Dedov;Egbert Myjer;George Nicolaou;Guido Raimondi;Helena Jäderblom;Ineta Ziemele;Isabelle Berro-Lefèvre;Ján Šikuta;Josep Casadevall;Luis López Guerra;Mark Villiger;Mihai Poalelungi;Paul Lemmens
Represented by: MAZON COSTA J.L.
Issue: Agreement of 3 January 1979 between Spain and the Holy See on education and cultural affairs ; Order of 11 October 1982 on teachers of Catholic religion and ethics in secondary educational centres ; Canons 804 and 805 of the Code of Canon Law ; Article 16 § 3 of the Constitution
Strasbourg case-law cited: Bigaeva v. Greece, no 26713/05, § 23, 28 May 2009;C.G. and Others v. Bulgaria, no 1365/07, § 39, 24 April 2008;Christine Goodwin v. the United Kingdom [GC], no 28957/95, § 90, ECHR 2002 VI;Coster v. the United Kingdom [GC], no 24876/94, § 104, 18 January 2001;Elsholz v. Germany [GC], no 25735/94, § 52, ECHR 2000 VIII;Evans v. the United Kingdom [GC], no 6339/05, §§ 75-76, ECHR 2007 IV;Fuentes Bobo v. Spain, no 39293/98, § 38, 29 February 2000;Hasan and Chaush v. Bulgaria [GC], no 30985/96, ECHR 2000 XI;Holy Synod of the Bulgarian Orthodox Church (Metropolitan Inokentiy) and Others v. Bulgaria, nos. 412/03 and 35677/04, § 10, 22 January 2009;Kopp v. Switzerland, 25 March 1998, § 55, Reports of Judgments and Decisions 1998 II;Leyla Şahin v. Turkey [GC], no 44774/98, ECHR 2005 XI;Lombardi Vallauri v. Italy, no 39128/05, 20 October 2009;Martínez Martínez v. Spain, no 21532/08, § 57, 18 October 2011;Metropolitan Church of Bessarabia and Others v. Moldova, no. 45701/99, § 118, ECHR 2001 XII;Miroļubovs and Others v. Latvia, no 798/05, 15 September 2009;Mółka v. Poland (dec.), no 56550/00, ECHR 2006 IV;Neulinger and Shuruk v. Switzerland [GC], no 41615/07, § 99, ECHR 2010;Niemietz v. Germany, 16 December 1992, § 29, Series A no 251 B;Obst v. Germany, no 425/03, 23 September 2010;Oleksandr Volkov v. Ukraine, no 21722/11, § 165-167, ECHR 2013;Özpınar v. Turkey, no 20999/04, §§ 43-48, 19 October 2010;Pretty v. the United Kingdom, no 2346/02, § 61, ECHR 2002 III;S. and Marper v. the United Kingdom [GC], nos. 30562/04 and 30566/04, §§ 101-102, ECHR 2008;Sahin v. Germany [GC], no 30943/96, § 68, ECHR 2003 VIII;Schüth v. Germany, no 1620/03, ECHR 2010;Siebenhaar v. Germany, no 18136/02, 3 February 2011;Sindicatul “Păstorul cel Bun” v. Romania [GC], no 2330/09, 9 July 2013;Svyato-Mykhaylivska Parafiya v. Ukraine, no 77703/01, § 146, 14 June 2007;Von Hannover v. Germany (no 2) [GC], nos. 40660/08 and 60641/08, §§ 104-107, ECHR 2012;W. v. the United Kingdom, 8 July 1987, §§ 62 and 64, Series A no 121
Conclusion: No violation of Article 8 - Right to respect for private and family life (Article 8-1 - Respect for private life)
Separate opinion: TRUE
CASE OF FERNÁNDEZ MARTÍNEZ v. SPAIN
Hearing: Fernandez Martinez v. Spain (no. 56030/07) (Grand Chamber hearing, 2013-01-30 00:00:00)
Application no.: 56030/07
Document type: CHAMBER
Document date: 2012-05-15 00:00:00
ECLI: ECLI:CE:ECHR:2012:0515JUD005603007
Respondent state: ESP
Articles of the Convention: 8;8-1;35
Judges: Alejandro Saiz Arnaiz;Alvina Gyulumyan;Corneliu Bîrsan;Egbert Myjer;Ineta Ziemele;Josep Casadevall;Luis López Guerra;Mihai Poalelungi
Represented by: MAZON COSTA J.L.
Issue: Article 16 § 3 of the Constitution ; Canon 805 of the Code of Canon Law
Strasbourg case-law cited: Ahtinen v. Finland, no 48907/99, § 41, 23 September 2008;Bigaeva v. Greece, no 26713/05, § 23, 28 May 2009;Campagnano v. Italy, no 77955/01, § 53, ECHR 2006-V;Christine Goodwin v. the United Kingdom [GC], no 28957/95, § 90, ECHR 2002-VI;Dahlab v. Switzerland (dec.), no 42393/98, ECHR 2001-V;Evans v. the United Kingdom [GC], no 6339/05, ECHR 2007-IV;Fuentes Bobo v. Spain, no 39293/98, § 38, 29 February 2000;Gatt v. Malta, no 28221/08, § 19, 27 July 2010;Hasan and Chaush v. Bulgaria [GC], no 30985/96, §§ 62 and 78, ECHR 2000-XI;Jusic v. Switzerland, no 4691/06, § 99, 2 December 2010;K.A. and A.D. v. Belgium, no 42758/98 and 45558/99, § 83, 17 February 2005;Leyla Sahin v. Turkey [GC], no 44774/98, § 108, ECHR 2005-XI;Lombardi Vallauri v. Italy, no 39128/05, § 38, 20 October 2009;Lombardi Vallauri v. Italy, no 39128/05, § 41, 20 October 2009;Mólka v. Poland (dec.), no 56550/00, ECHR 2006-IV;Niemietz v. Germany, 16 December 1992, § 29, Series A no 251-B;Obst v. Germany, no 425/03, 23 September 2010;Pretty v. the United Kingdom, no 2346/02, § 61, ECHR 2002-III;Rommelfanger v. Germany, no 12242/86, decision of the Commission du 6 September 1989, Decisions and Reports no 62;Schüth v. Germany, no 1620/03, ECHR 2010;Sidabras and Džiautas v. Lithuania, nos. 55480/00 and 59330/00, § 43, ECHR 2004-VIII;Siebenhaar v. Germany, no 18136/02, 3 February 2011;Smirnova v. Russia, nos. 46133/99 and 48183/99, § 95, ECHR 2003-IX (extracts);Svyato-Mykhaylivska Parafiya v. Ukraine, no 77703/01, § 146, 14 June 2007
External sources: Directive 2000/78/EC establishing a general framework for equal treatment in employment and occupation
Conclusion: Remainder inadmissible;No violation of Article 8 - Right to respect for private and family life (Article 8-1 - Respect for private life)
Separate opinion: TRUE
CASE OF MAKTOUF AND DAMJANOVIĆ v. BOSNIA AND HERZEGOVINA
Hearing: Maktouf and Damjanovic v. Bosnia and Herzegovina (nos. 2312/08 and 34179/08) (Grand Chamber hearing, 2012-12-12 00:00:00)
Application no.: 2312/08
Document type: GRANDCHAMBER
Document date: 2013-07-18 00:00:00
ECLI: ECLI:CE:ECHR:2013:0718JUD000231208
Respondent state: BIH
Articles of the Convention: 6;6-1;7;7-1;14;35;35-1;41;P12-1
Judges: Angelika Nußberger;David Thór Björgvinsson;Dean Spielmann;George Nicolaou;Guido Raimondi;Ineta Ziemele;Isabelle Berro-Lefèvre;Johannes Silvis;Josep Casadevall;Kristina Pardalos;Lech Garlicki;Mark Villiger;Mirjana Lazarova Trajkovska;Nebojša Vučinić;Nona Tsotsoria;Päivi Hirvelä;Paulo Pinto De Albuquerque;Zdravka Kalaydjieva
Represented by: LOZO A. ; MEHIC I.
Issue: Articles 24 § 1, 37 § 2, 38 § 1 and § 2 , 43 § 1 and 142 § 1 of the 1976 Criminal Code ; Articles 31 § 1, 42 §§ 1 and 2, 49, 50 § 1 and 173 § 1 of the 2003 Criminal Code
Strasbourg case-law cited: Achour v. France [GC], no. 67335/01, § 44, ECHR 2006-IV;Akdivar and Others v. Turkey, 16 September 1996, §§ 65-69, Reports of Judgments and Decisions 1996-IV;Brudnicka and Others v. Poland, no. 54723/00, § 38, ECHR 2005-II;Camilleri v. Malta, no. 42931/10, 22 January 2013;Campbell and Fell v. the United Kingdom, 28 June 1984, § 78, Series A no. 80;Ecer and Zeyrek v. Turkey, nos. 29295/95 and 29363/95, ECHR 2001-II;Flux v. Moldova (no. 2), no. 31001/03, § 27, 3 July 2007;Gabarri Moreno v. Spain, no. 68066/01, 22 July 2003;Henryk Urban and Ryszard Urban v. Poland, no. 23614/08, §§ 45-53, 30 November 2010;Jamil v. France, 8 June 1995, Series A no. 317-B;Karmo v. Bulgaria (dec.), no. 76965/01, 9 February 2006;Kononov v. Latvia [GC], no. 36376/04, ECHR 2010;Magee v. the United Kingdom, no. 28135/95, § 50, ECHR 2000 VI;Mirazovic v. Bosnia and Herzegovina (dec.), no. 13628/03, 6 May 2006;Ould Dah v. France (dec.), no. 13113/03, ECHR 2009;Palic v. Bosnia and Herzegovina, no. 4704/04, 15 February 2011;S.W. v. the United Kingdom, 22 November 1995, Series A no. 335-B;Scoppola v. Italy (no. 2) [GC], no. 10249/03, 17 September 2009;Sejdic and Finci v. Bosnia and Herzegovina [GC], nos. 27996/06 and 34836/06, § 55, ECHR 2009;Šimšic v. Bosnia and Herzegovina (dec.), no. 51552/10, 10 April 2012;Stafford v. the United Kingdom [GC], no. 46295/99, § 78, ECHR 2002-IV;Streletz, Kessler and Krenz v. Germany [GC], nos. 34044/96, 35532/97 and 44801/98, ECHR 2001-II
Conclusion: Remainder inadmissible;Violation of Article 7 - No punishment without law (Article 7-1 - Heavier penalty;Retroactivity);Pecuniary damage - claim dismissed;Non-pecuniary damage - finding of violation sufficient
Separate opinion: TRUE
MAKTOUF v. BOSNIA AND HERZEGOVINA
Hearing: Maktouf and Damjanovic v. Bosnia and Herzegovina (nos. 2312/08 and 34179/08) (Grand Chamber hearing, 2012-12-12 00:00:00)
Application no.: 2312/08
Document type: COMMUNICATEDCASES
Document date: 2010-08-31 00:00:00
Respondent state: BIH
Articles of the Convention: 6;6-1;7;7-1
Represented by: LOZO A. ; MEHIC I.
Conclusion: Communicated
Separate opinion: FALSE
CASE OF MAKTOUF AND DAMJANOVIĆ v. BOSNIA AND HERZEGOVINA
Hearing: Maktouf and Damjanovic v. Bosnia and Herzegovina (nos. 2312/08 and 34179/08) (Grand Chamber hearing, 2012-12-12 00:00:00)
Application no.: 34179/08
Document type: GRANDCHAMBER
Document date: 2013-07-18 00:00:00
ECLI: ECLI:CE:ECHR:2013:0718JUD000231208
Respondent state: BIH
Articles of the Convention: 6;6-1;7;7-1;14;35;35-1;41;P12-1
Judges: Angelika Nußberger;David Thór Björgvinsson;Dean Spielmann;George Nicolaou;Guido Raimondi;Ineta Ziemele;Isabelle Berro-Lefèvre;Johannes Silvis;Josep Casadevall;Kristina Pardalos;Lech Garlicki;Mark Villiger;Mirjana Lazarova Trajkovska;Nebojša Vučinić;Nona Tsotsoria;Päivi Hirvelä;Paulo Pinto De Albuquerque;Zdravka Kalaydjieva
Represented by: LOZO A. ; MEHIC I.
Issue: Articles 24 § 1, 37 § 2, 38 § 1 and § 2 , 43 § 1 and 142 § 1 of the 1976 Criminal Code ; Articles 31 § 1, 42 §§ 1 and 2, 49, 50 § 1 and 173 § 1 of the 2003 Criminal Code
Strasbourg case-law cited: Achour v. France [GC], no. 67335/01, § 44, ECHR 2006-IV;Akdivar and Others v. Turkey, 16 September 1996, §§ 65-69, Reports of Judgments and Decisions 1996-IV;Brudnicka and Others v. Poland, no. 54723/00, § 38, ECHR 2005-II;Camilleri v. Malta, no. 42931/10, 22 January 2013;Campbell and Fell v. the United Kingdom, 28 June 1984, § 78, Series A no. 80;Ecer and Zeyrek v. Turkey, nos. 29295/95 and 29363/95, ECHR 2001-II;Flux v. Moldova (no. 2), no. 31001/03, § 27, 3 July 2007;Gabarri Moreno v. Spain, no. 68066/01, 22 July 2003;Henryk Urban and Ryszard Urban v. Poland, no. 23614/08, §§ 45-53, 30 November 2010;Jamil v. France, 8 June 1995, Series A no. 317-B;Karmo v. Bulgaria (dec.), no. 76965/01, 9 February 2006;Kononov v. Latvia [GC], no. 36376/04, ECHR 2010;Magee v. the United Kingdom, no. 28135/95, § 50, ECHR 2000 VI;Mirazovic v. Bosnia and Herzegovina (dec.), no. 13628/03, 6 May 2006;Ould Dah v. France (dec.), no. 13113/03, ECHR 2009;Palic v. Bosnia and Herzegovina, no. 4704/04, 15 February 2011;S.W. v. the United Kingdom, 22 November 1995, Series A no. 335-B;Scoppola v. Italy (no. 2) [GC], no. 10249/03, 17 September 2009;Sejdic and Finci v. Bosnia and Herzegovina [GC], nos. 27996/06 and 34836/06, § 55, ECHR 2009;Šimšic v. Bosnia and Herzegovina (dec.), no. 51552/10, 10 April 2012;Stafford v. the United Kingdom [GC], no. 46295/99, § 78, ECHR 2002-IV;Streletz, Kessler and Krenz v. Germany [GC], nos. 34044/96, 35532/97 and 44801/98, ECHR 2001-II
Conclusion: Remainder inadmissible;Violation of Article 7 - No punishment without law (Article 7-1 - Heavier penalty;Retroactivity);Pecuniary damage - claim dismissed;Non-pecuniary damage - finding of violation sufficient
Separate opinion: TRUE
CASE OF VINTER AND OTHERS v. THE UNITED KINGDOM
Hearing: Vinter and Others v. United Kingdom (no. 66069/09, 130/10 et 3896/10) (Grand Chamber hearing, 2012-11-28 00:00:00)
Application no.: 66069/09
Document type: GRANDCHAMBER
Document date: 2013-07-09 00:00:00
ECLI: ECLI:CE:ECHR:2013:0709JUD006606909
Respondent state: GBR
Articles of the Convention: 3;41
Judges: András Sajó;Ann Power-Forde;David Thór Björgvinsson;Dean Spielmann;George Nicolaou;Guido Raimondi;Ineta Ziemele;Isabelle Berro-Lefèvre;Johannes Silvis;Josep Casadevall;Lech Garlicki;Linos-Alexandre Sicilianos;Luis López Guerra;Mark Villiger;Mirjana Lazarova Trajkovska;Nebojša Vučinić;Nona Tsotsoria;Paul Lemmens;Paul Mahoney
Represented by: CREIGHTON S. ; WEATHERBY P. ; VAN ZYL SMIT D. ; WOODS B. ; HORWELL R. ; HINDMARSH L. ; CHIVERS SOLICITORS, BINGLEY ; McKONE M.
Issue: The Criminal Justice Act 2003 ; The 1998 Human Rights Act
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)
Conclusion: Violation of Article 3 - Prohibition of torture (Article 3 - Degrading punishment;Inhuman punishment) (Substantive aspect);Non-pecuniary damage - finding of violation sufficient
Separate opinion: TRUE
CASE OF VINTER  AND OTHERS v. THE UNITED KINGDOM
Hearing: Vinter and Others v. United Kingdom (no. 66069/09, 130/10 et 3896/10) (Grand Chamber hearing, 2012-11-28 00:00:00)
Application no.: 66069/09
Document type: CHAMBER
Document date: 2012-01-17 00:00:00
ECLI: ECLI:CE:ECHR:2012:0117JUD006606909
Respondent state: GBR
Articles of the Convention: 3;35
Judges: David Thór Björgvinsson;George Nicolaou;Lech Garlicki;Ledi Bianku;Nicolas Bratza;Päivi Hirvelä;Vincent A. De Gaetano
Represented by: CREIGHTON S. ; WOODS B. ; Chivers Solicitors
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
Conclusion: Remainder inadmissible;No violation of Article 3 - Prohibition of torture (Article 3 - Degrading punishment;Inhuman punishment) (Substantive aspect)
Separate opinion: TRUE
CASE OF VINTER AND OTHERS v. THE UNITED KINGDOM
Hearing: Vinter and Others v. United Kingdom (no. 66069/09, 130/10 et 3896/10) (Grand Chamber hearing, 2012-11-28 00:00:00)
Application no.: 130/10
Document type: GRANDCHAMBER
Document date: 2013-07-09 00:00:00
ECLI: ECLI:CE:ECHR:2013:0709JUD006606909
Respondent state: GBR
Articles of the Convention: 3;41
Judges: András Sajó;Ann Power-Forde;David Thór Björgvinsson;Dean Spielmann;George Nicolaou;Guido Raimondi;Ineta Ziemele;Isabelle Berro-Lefèvre;Johannes Silvis;Josep Casadevall;Lech Garlicki;Linos-Alexandre Sicilianos;Luis López Guerra;Mark Villiger;Mirjana Lazarova Trajkovska;Nebojša Vučinić;Nona Tsotsoria;Paul Lemmens;Paul Mahoney
Represented by: CREIGHTON S. ; WEATHERBY P. ; VAN ZYL SMIT D. ; WOODS B. ; HORWELL R. ; HINDMARSH L. ; CHIVERS SOLICITORS, BINGLEY ; McKONE M.
Issue: The Criminal Justice Act 2003 ; The 1998 Human Rights Act
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)
Conclusion: Violation of Article 3 - Prohibition of torture (Article 3 - Degrading punishment;Inhuman punishment) (Substantive aspect);Non-pecuniary damage - finding of violation sufficient
Separate opinion: TRUE
CASE OF VINTER  AND OTHERS v. THE UNITED KINGDOM
Hearing: Vinter and Others v. United Kingdom (no. 66069/09, 130/10 et 3896/10) (Grand Chamber hearing, 2012-11-28 00:00:00)
Application no.: 130/10
Document type: CHAMBER
Document date: 2012-01-17 00:00:00
ECLI: ECLI:CE:ECHR:2012:0117JUD006606909
Respondent state: GBR
Articles of the Convention: 3;35
Judges: David Thór Björgvinsson;George Nicolaou;Lech Garlicki;Ledi Bianku;Nicolas Bratza;Päivi Hirvelä;Vincent A. De Gaetano
Represented by: CREIGHTON S. ; WOODS B. ; Chivers Solicitors
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
Conclusion: Remainder inadmissible;No violation of Article 3 - Prohibition of torture (Article 3 - Degrading punishment;Inhuman punishment) (Substantive aspect)
Separate opinion: TRUE