CASE OF NASR AND GHALI v. ITALY
Hearing: Nasr and Ghali v. Italy (no. 44883/09) (Chamber hearing, 2015-06-23 00:00:00)
Application no.: 44883/09
Document type: CHAMBER
Document date: 2016-02-23 00:00:00
ECLI: ECLI:CE:ECHR:2016:0223JUD004488309
Respondent state: ITA
Articles of the Convention: 1;3;5;5-1;8;8-1;8-2;13;13+3;13+5;13+8;35;35-1;41
Represented by: BAUCCIO L.
Strasbourg case-law cited: Abdülsamet Yaman v. Turkey, no 32446/96, §§ 57-59, 2 November 2004;Akdivar and Others v. Turkey, 16 September 1996, § 68, Reports of Judgments and Decisions 1996 IV;Aksoy v. Turkey, 18 December 1996, § 64, Reports 1996 VI;Batı and Others v. Turkey, nos. 33097/96 and 57834/00, §§ 142-147, ECHR 2004 IV (extracts);Baumann v. France, no 33592/96, § 47, ECHR 2001 V;Çakıcı v. Turkey [GC], no 23657/94, § 85, ECHR 1999 IV;Cestaro v. Italy, no 6884/11, 7 April 2015;Chahal v. the United Kingdom, 15 November 1996, § 118, Reports 1996 V;Dembele v. Switzerland, no 74010/11, § 33, 24 September 2013;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, § 70, ECHR 2010;Egmez v. Cyprus, no 30873/96, § 78, ECHR 2000 XII;El-Masri v. the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia [GC], no 39630/09, §§ 137-148, ECHR 2012;Erdal Aslan v. Turkey, nos. 25060/02 and 1705/03, §§ 76-77, 2 December 2008;Hüseyin Şimşek v. Turkey, no 68881/01, §§ 68-70, 20 May 2008;Ilaşcu and Others v. Moldova and Russia [GC], no  48787/99, § 318, ECHR 2004 VII;İlhan v. Turkey [GC], no 22277/93, § 85, ECHR 2000 VII;Imakayeva v. Russia, no 7615/02, § 164, ECHR 2006 XIII (extracts);Ireland v. the United Kingdom, 18 January 1978, § 162, Series A no 25;Jabari v. Turkey, no 40035/98, § 50, ECHR 2000-VIII;Jalloh v. Germany [GC], no 54810/00, § 67, ECHR 2006 IX;Karoussiotis v. Portugal, no 23205/08, §§ 57 and 87-92, ECHR 2011;Kopylov v. Russia, no 3933/04, § 119, 29 July 2010;Krastanov v. Bulgaria, no 50222/99, § 53, 30 September 2004;Kurt v. Turkey, 25 May 1998, § 140, Reports 1998-III;Labita v. Italy [GC], no 26772/95, § 119, ECHR 2000 IV;Łatak v. Poland (dec.), no 52070/08, 12 October 2010;Mahmut Kaya v. Turkey, no 22535/93, § 115, ECHR 2000 III;Mamatkoulov and Askarov v. Turkey [GC], nos. 46827/99 and 46951/99, § 67, ECHR 2005-I;Rafaa v. France, no 25393/10, § 33, 30 May 2013;Saadi v. Italy [GC], no 37201/06, §§ 125-126, ECHR 2008;Saba v. Italy, no 36629/10, §§ 79-80, 1 July 2014;Salman v. Turkey [GC], no 21986/93, § 100, ECHR 2000 VII;Samoylov v. Russia, no 64398/01, § 39, 2 October 2008;Sapožkovs v. Latvia, no 8550/03, §§ 54-55, 11 February 2014;Selmouni v. France [GC], no 25803/94, § 95, ECHR 1999-V;Soering v. the United Kingdom, 7 July 1989, § 91, Series A no 161;Vučković and Others v. Serbia (preliminary objection) [GC], nos. 17153/11 and 29 others,  §§ 69-77, 25 March 2014;Z and Others v. the United Kingdom [GC], no 29392/95, § 73, ECHR 2001 V;Zeynep Özcan v. Turkey, no 45906/99, § 43, 20 February 2007
Conclusion: Preliminary objection dismissed (Article 35-1 - Exhaustion of domestic remedies;Six month period);Violation of Article 3 - Prohibition of torture (Article 3 - Degrading treatment;Inhuman treatment) (Substantive aspect);Violation of Article 3 - Prohibition of torture (Article 3 - Effective investigation) (Procedural aspect);Violation of Article 5 - Right to liberty and security (Article 5-1 - Lawful arrest or detention);Violation of Article 8 - Right to respect for private and family life (Article 8-1 - Respect for family life;Respect for private life);Violation of Article 3 - Prohibition of torture (Article 3 - Inhuman treatment) (Substantive aspect);Violation of Article 3 - Prohibition of torture (Article 3 - Effective investigation) (Procedural aspect);Violation of Article 8 - Right to respect for private and family life (Article 8-1 - Respect for family life;Respect for private life);Violation of Article 13+3 - Right to an effective remedy (Article 13 - Effective remedy) (Article 3 - Prohibition of torture);Violation of Article 13+5 - Right to an effective remedy (Article 13 - Effective remedy) (Article 5 - Right to liberty and security);Violation of Article 13+8 - Right to an effective remedy (Article 13 - Effective remedy) (Article 8 - Right to respect for private and family life);Violation of Article 13+3 - Right to an effective remedy (Article 13 - Effective remedy) (Article 3 - Prohibition of torture);Violation of Article 13+8 - Right to an effective remedy (Article 13 - Effective remedy) (Article 8 - Right to respect for private and family life);Non-pecuniary damage - award (Article 41 - Non-pecuniary damage;Just satisfaction)
Separate opinion: FALSE