CASE OF ARMANI DA SILVA v. THE UNITED KINGDOM
Hearing: Armani Da Silva v. the United Kingdom (no. 5878/08) (Grand Chamber hearing, 2015-06-10 00:00:00)
Application no.: 5878/08
Document type: GRANDCHAMBER
Document date: 2016-03-30 00:00:00
ECLI: ECLI:CE:ECHR:2016:0330JUD000587808
Respondent state: GBR
Articles of the Convention: 2;2-1;35
Judges: Branko Lubarda;Dean Spielmann;Dmitry Dedov;George Nicolaou;Guido Raimondi;Ineta Ziemele;Josep Casadevall;Krzysztof Wojtyczek;Ledi Bianku;Linos-Alexandre Sicilianos;Luis López Guerra;Mark Villiger;Nebojša Vučinić;Päivi Hirvelä;Paul Mahoney;Vincent A. De Gaetano;Yonko Grozev;Zdravka Kalaydjieva
Represented by: WISTRICH H.
Issue: Offences under the Health and Safety at Work etc. Act 1974



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
Conclusion: Remainder inadmissible;No violation of Article 2 - Right to life (Article 2-1 - Effective investigation) (Procedural aspect)
Separate opinion: TRUE