taltwi/LaCour huggingface dataset:
M.B. v. RUSSIA
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)
Application no.: 61420/15
Document type: COMMUNICATEDCASES
Respondent state: RUS
Articles of the Convention: 3;5;5-1
Represented by: DAVIDIYAN E. ; TRENINA D.
Conclusion: Communicated
CASE OF Z.A. AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA
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)
Application no.: 61427/15
Document type: CHAMBER
Document date: 2017-03-28 00:00:00
ECLI: ECLI:CE:ECHR:2017:0328JUD006141115
Respondent state: RUS
Articles of the Convention: 3;5;5-1;5-1-f;41;46;46-2
Judges: Alena Poláčková;Branko Lubarda;Dmitry Dedov;Georgios A. Serghides;Helen Keller;Helena Jäderblom;Pere Pastor Vilanova
Represented by: DAVIDYAN E. ; TRENINA D.
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

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)
Separate opinion: TRUE
A.M. v. RUSSIA
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)
Application no.: 61427/15
Document type: COMMUNICATEDCASES
Respondent state: RUS
Articles of the Convention: 3;5;5-1-b
Represented by: DAVIDIYAN E. ; TRENINA D.
Conclusion: Communicated
CASE OF Z.A. AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA
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)
Application no.: 3028/16
Document type: CHAMBER
Document date: 2017-03-28 00:00:00
ECLI: ECLI:CE:ECHR:2017:0328JUD006141115
Respondent state: RUS
Articles of the Convention: 3;5;5-1;5-1-f;41;46;46-2
Judges: Alena Poláčková;Branko Lubarda;Dmitry Dedov;Georgios A. Serghides;Helen Keller;Helena Jäderblom;Pere Pastor Vilanova
Represented by: DAVIDYAN E. ; TRENINA D.
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

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)
Separate opinion: TRUE
YASIEN v. RUSSIA
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)
Application no.: 3028/16
Document type: COMMUNICATEDCASES
Respondent state: RUS
Articles of the Convention: 3
Conclusion: Communicated
GUZELYURTLU AND OTHERS v. CYPRUS AND TURKEY
Hearing: Güzelyurtlu and Others v. Cyprus and Turkey (no. 36925/07) (Grand Chamber hearing, 2018-03-28 00:00:00)
Application no.: 36925/07
Document type: COMMUNICATEDCASES
Document date: 2009-05-13 00:00:00
Respondent state: CYP
Articles of the Convention: 2;13
Represented by: RIZA A. ; MELEAGROU E.
Conclusion: Communicated
Separate opinion: FALSE
CASE OF LEKIĆ v. SLOVENIA
Hearing: Lekić v. Slovenia (no. 36480/07) (Grand Chamber hearing, 2018-03-14 00:00:00)
Application no.: 36480/07
Document type: CHAMBER
Document date: 2017-02-14 00:00:00
ECLI: ECLI:CE:ECHR:2017:0214JUD003648007
Respondent state: SVN
Articles of the Convention: 35;P1-1;P1-1-1
Judges: András Sajó;Boštjan Zalar;Iulia Motoc;Marko Bošnjak;Nona Tsotsoria;Paulo Pinto De Albuquerque;Vincent A. De Gaetano;Gabriele Kucsko-Stadlmayer
Represented by: ZDOLSEK S.
Issue: Companies Act of 1993 ; Financial Operations of Companies Act of 1999

Strasbourg case-law cited: A.N. v. Lithuania, no. 17280/08, § 77, 31 May 2016;Agrotexim and Others v. Greece, 24 October 1995, § 66, Series A no. 330 A;Baghli v. France, no. 34374/97, § 31, ECHR 1999 VIII;Beyeler v. Italy [GC], no. 33202/96, §§ 109-11, ECHR 2000-I;Cañete de Goñi v. Spain, no. 55782/00, § 36, ECHR 2002-VIII;Cantoni v. France, 15 November 1996, § 35, Reports 1996-V;Capital Bank AD v. Bulgaria, no. 49429/99, §§ 132-34, ECHR 2005-XII (extracts);Company S. and T. v. Sweden, no. 11189/84, Commission decision of 11 December 1986, DR 50, p. 138;Depalle v. France [GC], no. 34044/02, § 77, ECHR 2010;Forminster Enterprises Limited v. the Czech Republic, no. 38238/04, § 59, 9 October 2008;Forrer-Niedenthal v. Germany, no. 47316/99, § 39, 20 February 2003;Fredin v. Sweden (no. 1), 18 February 1991, § 50, Series A no. 192;Guerra and Others v. Italy, 19 February 1998, § 44, Reports of Judgments and Decisions 1998-I;Hasan and Chaush v. Bulgaria [GC], no. 30985/96, § 84, ECHR 2000-XI;Hennings v. Germany, 16 December 1992, § 26, Series A no. 251-A;Hutten-Czapska v. Poland [GC], no. 35014/97, § 165, ECHR 2006-VIII;Iatridis v. Greece [GC], no. 31107/96, § 58, ECHR 1999-II;Jahn and Others v. Germany [GC], nos. 46720/99, 72203/01 and 72552/01, § 91, ECHR 2005-VI;Jokela v. Finland, no. 28856/95, § 45, ECHR 2002-IV;K.-H.W. v. Germany [GC], no. 37201/97, § 73, ECHR 2001 II (extracts);Kurić and Others v. Slovenia [GC], no. 26828/06, § 296, ECHR 2012 (extracts);Olczak v. Poland (dec.), no. 30417/96, ECHR 2002-X;Pokis v. Latvia (dec.), no. 528/02, ECHR 2006-XV;S.C. Antares Transport S.A. and S.C. Transroby S.R.L. v. Romania, no. 27227/08, § 46, 15 December 2015;Sovtransavto Holding v. Ukraine, no. 48553/99, § 91, ECHR 2002-VII;Sporrong and Lönnroth v. Sweden, 23 September 1982, Series A no. 52;Stec and Others v. the United Kingdom [GC], no. 65731/01, § 52, ECHR 2006 VI;Stolyarova v. Russia, no. 15711/13, § 43, 29 January 2015;The Former King of Greece and Others v. Greece [GC], no. 25701/94, ECHR 2000 XII;Vefa Holding Sh.p.k. and Alimuçaj v. Albania (dec.), no. 24096/05, § 93, 14 June 2011;Vistiņš and Perepjolkins v. Latvia [GC], no. 71243/01, § 98, 25 October 2012;Wittek v. Germany, no. 37290/97, § 49, ECHR 2002-X
Conclusion: Remainder inadmissible;No violation of Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 - Protection of property (Article 1 para. 1 of Protocol No. 1 - Deprivation of property;Peaceful enjoyment of possessions;Possessions)
Separate opinion: FALSE
CASE OF FERNANDES DE OLIVEIRA v. PORTUGAL
Hearing: Fernandes de Oliveira v. Portugal (no. 78103/14) (Grand Chamber hearing, 2018-03-07 00:00:00)
Application no.: 78103/14
Document type: GRANDCHAMBER
Document date: 2019-01-31 00:00:00
ECLI: ECLI:CE:ECHR:2019:0131JUD007810314
Respondent state: PRT
Articles of the Convention: 2;2-1;35;41
Judges: Alena Poláčková;Angelika Nußberger;Armen Harutyunyan;Branko Lubarda;Carlo Ranzoni;Egidijus Kūris;Ganna Yudkivska;Guido Raimondi;Helena Jäderblom;Krzysztof Wojtyczek;Linos-Alexandre Sicilianos;Luis López Guerra;Marko Bošnjak;Mārtiņš Mits;Nona Tsotsoria;Pauliine Koskelo;Paulo Pinto De Albuquerque;Robert Spano;Síofra O'Leary;Yonko Grozev
Represented by: PAIS DO AMARAL J. ; PEREIRA DE SOUSA A. ; BOTELHO C.
Issue: Mental Health Act (Law no. 36/98 of 24 July 1998) ; Guidelines of the Directorate General of Health on restraint no. 21/2011 dated 6 June 2011 ; Article 2 § 2, c) of Regulatory Decree No. 66/2007, of 29 May 2007, as amended by Regulatory Decree No. 21/2008, of 2 December 2008

Strasbourg case-law cited: Bilbija and Blaževic v. Croatia, no 62870/13, § 107, 12 January 2016;Calvelli and Ciglio v. Italy [GC], no 32967/96, ECHR 2002 I;Çoselav v. Turkey, no 1413/07, § 57, 9 October 2012;De Donder and De Clippel v. Belgium, no 8595/06, § 75, 6 December 2011;Dodov v. Bulgaria, no 59548/00, § 80, 17 January 2008;Haas v. Switzerland, no 31322/07, § 54, ECHR 2011;Hiller v. Austria, no 1967/14, 22 November 2016;J.N. v. the United Kingdom, no 37289/12, § 77, 19 May 2016;Keenan v. the United Kingdom, no 27229/95, ECHR 2001 III;Ketreb v. France, no 38447/09, § 78, 19 July 2012;Lopes de Sousa Fernandes v. Portugal [GC], no 56080/13, 19 December 2017;Mitic v. Serbia, no 31963/08, 22 January 2013;Osman v. the United Kingdom, 28 October 1998, §§ 115-116, Reports of Judgments and Decisions 1998 VIII;Radomilja and Others v. Croatia [GC], nos. 37685/10 and 22768/12, § 126, 20 March 2018;Renolde v. France, no 5608/05, ECHR 2008 (extracts);Reynolds v. the United Kingdom, no 2694/08, 13 March 2012;Sargsyan v. Azerbaijan (just satisfaction) [GC], no 40167/06, § 61, 12 Decembre 2017;Šilih v. Slovenia [GC], no 71463/01, §196, 9 April 2009;Volk v. Slovenia, no 62120/09, § 86, 13 December 2012;Younger v. the United Kingdom (dec.), no 57420/00, ECHR 2003 I
Conclusion: Remainder inadmissible (Art. 35) Admissibility criteria;No violation of Article 2 - Right to life (Article 2 - Positive obligations;Article 2-1 - Life) (Substantive aspect);Violation of Article 2 - Right to life (Article 2-1 - Effective investigation) (Procedural aspect);Pecuniary damage - claim dismissed (Article 41 - Pecuniary damage;Just satisfaction);Non-pecuniary damage - award (Article 41 - Non-pecuniary damage;Just satisfaction)
Separate opinion: TRUE
CASE OF FERNANDES DE OLIVEIRA v. PORTUGAL
Hearing: Fernandes de Oliveira v. Portugal (no. 78103/14) (Grand Chamber hearing, 2018-03-07 00:00:00)
Application no.: 78103/14
Document type: CHAMBER
Document date: 2017-03-28 00:00:00
ECLI: ECLI:CE:ECHR:2017:0328JUD007810314
Respondent state: PRT
Articles of the Convention: 2;2-1;41
Judges: Egidijus Kūris;Ganna Yudkivska;Iulia Motoc;Krzysztof Wojtyczek;Marko Bošnjak;Nona Tsotsoria;Paulo Pinto De Albuquerque
Represented by: PAIS DO AMARAL J.
Strasbourg case-law cited: Calvelli and Ciglio v. Italy [GC], no. 32967/96, § 49, ECHR 2002 I;Centre for Legal Resources on behalf of Valentin Câmpeanu v. Romania [GC], no. 47848/08, § 131, ECHR 2014;Dodov v. Bulgaria, no. 59548/00, § 80, 17 January 2008;Editions Plon v. France, no. 58148/00, § 64, ECHR 2004 IV;Guerra and Others v. Italy, 19 February 1998, § 44, Reports of Judgments and Decisions 1998 I;Haas v. Switzerland, no. 31322/07, § 54, ECHR 2011;Hiller v. Austria, no. 1967/14, §§ 52-53, 22 November 2016;Igor Shevchenko v. Ukraine, no. 22737/04, § 60, 12 January 2012;Jagiełło v. Poland (dec.) [Committee], no. 21782/15, § 23, 24 January 2017;Keenan v. the United Kingdom, no. 27229/95, § 111, ECHR 2001 III;Kudra v. Croatia, no. 13904/07, § 113, 18 December 2012;L.C.B. v. the United Kingdom, 9 June 1998, § 36, Reports 1998 III;Paul and Audrey Edwards v. the United Kingdom, no. 46477/99, § 86, ECHR 2002 II;Renolde v. France, no. 5608/05, § 81, ECHR 2008 (extracts);Reynolds v. the United Kingdom, no. 2694/08, 13 March 2012;Rivière v. France, no. 33834/03, § 63, 11 July 2006;Šilih v. Slovenia [GC], no. 71463/01, §§ 155 and 195, 9 April 2009;Tanrıbilir v. Turkey, no. 21422/93, §§ 70-71, 16 November 2000
Conclusion: Violation of Article 2 - Right to life (Article 2 - Positive obligations;Article 2-1 - Life) (Substantive aspect);Violation of Article 2 - Right to life (Article 2-1 - Effective investigation) (Procedural aspect);Pecuniary damage - claim dismissed (Article 41 - Pecuniary damage;Just satisfaction);Non-pecuniary damage - award (Article 41 - Non-pecuniary damage;Just satisfaction);Pecuniary damage - award (Article 41 - Pecuniary damage;Just satisfaction)
Separate opinion: FALSE
FERNANDES DE OLIVEIRA v. PORTUGAL
Hearing: Fernandes de Oliveira v. Portugal (no. 78103/14) (Grand Chamber hearing, 2018-03-07 00:00:00)
Application no.: 78103/14
Document type: COMMUNICATEDCASES
Respondent state: PRT
Articles of the Convention: 2;2-1
Represented by: PAIS DO AMARAL J.
Conclusion: Communicated
CASE OF MURTAZALIYEVA v. RUSSIA
Hearing: Murtazaliyeva v. Russia (no. 36658/05) (Grand Chamber hearing, 2018-02-14 00:00:00)
Application no.: 36658/05
Document type: CHAMBER
Document date: 2017-05-09 00:00:00
ECLI: ECLI:CE:ECHR:2017:0509JUD003665805
Respondent state: RUS
Articles of the Convention: 6;6+6-3-b;6+6-3-d;6-3-b;6-3-d
Judges: Alena Poláčková;Branko Lubarda;Dmitry Dedov;Georgios A. Serghides;Helen Keller;Helena Jäderblom;Luis López Guerra
Represented by: KOROTEYEV K.
Conclusion: No violation of Article 6+6-3-b - Right to a fair trial (Article 6 - Criminal proceedings) (Article 6 - Right to a fair trial;Criminal proceedings;Article 6-3-b - Access to relevant files);No violation of Article 6+6-3-d - Right to a fair trial (Article 6 - Criminal proceedings) (Article 6 - Right to a fair trial;Article 6-3-d - Obtain attendance of witnesses)
Separate opinion: TRUE
CASE OF NAVALNYY v. RUSSIA
Hearing: Navalnyy v. Russia (nos. 29580/12, 36847/12, 11252/13, 12317/13 and 43746/14) (Grand Chamber hearing, 2018-01-24 00:00:00)
Application no.: 29580/12
Document type: CHAMBER
Document date: 2017-02-02 00:00:00
ECLI: ECLI:CE:ECHR:2017:0202JUD002958012
Respondent state: RUS
Articles of the Convention: 5;5-1;6;6-1;11;11-1;11-2;41
Judges: Alena Poláčková;Branko Lubarda;Dmitry Dedov;Helen Keller;Helena Jäderblom;Luis López Guerra;Pere Pastor Vilanova
Represented by: TEREKHOV K. ; MIKHAYLOVA O.
Issue: Articles 19.3, 27.2 and 27.3 of the Code of the Administrative Offences
Strasbourg case-law cited: Berladir and Others v. Russia, no. 34202/06, § 38, 10 July 2012;Bukta and Others v. Hungary, no. 25691/04, § 34, ECHR 2007 III;Ezelin v. France, 26 April 1991, § 37, Series A no. 202;Fáber v. Hungary, no. 40721/08, § 49, 24 July 2012;Frumkin v. Russia, no. 74568/12, 5 January 2016;Giulia Manzoni v. Italy, 1 July 1997, § 25, Reports 1997 IV;Kasparov and Others v. Russia, no. 21613/07, 3 October 2013;Kudrevičius and Others v. Lithuania [GC], no. 37553/05, ECHR 2015;Malofeyeva v. Russia, no. 36673/04, 30 May 2013;Mikhaylova v. Russia, no. 46998/08, §§ 57-69, 19 November 2015;Navalnyy and Yashin v. Russia, no. 76204/11, 4 December 2014;Nemtsov v. Russia, no. 1774/11, § 83, 31 July 2014;;Novikova and Others v. Russia, nos. 25501/07, 57569/11, 80153/12, 5790/13 and 35015/13, 26 April 2016;Oya Ataman v. Turkey, no. 74552/01, § 42, ECHR 2006 XIV;Schwabe and M.G. v. Germany, nos. 8080/08 and 8577/08, § 101, ECHR 2011 (extracts);Volkov and Adamskiy v. Russia, nos. 7614/09 and 30863/10, §§ 68 and 71, 26 March 2015
Conclusion: Violation of Article 11 - Freedom of assembly and association (Article 11-1 - Freedom of peaceful assembly);Violation of Article 5 - Right to liberty and security (Article 5-1 - Lawful arrest or detention);No violation of Article 6 - Right to a fair trial (Article 6 - Administrative proceedings;Article 6-1 - Fair hearing);Violation of Article 6 - Right to a fair trial (Article 6 - Administrative proceedings;Article 6-1 - Fair hearing);Pecuniary damage - award (Article 41 - Pecuniary damage;Just satisfaction);Non-pecuniary damage - award (Article 41 - Non-pecuniary damage;Just satisfaction)
Separate opinion: TRUE
NAVALNYY v. RUSSIA and 4 other applications
Hearing: Navalnyy v. Russia (nos. 29580/12, 36847/12, 11252/13, 12317/13 and 43746/14) (Grand Chamber hearing, 2018-01-24 00:00:00)
Application no.: 29580/12
Document type: COMMUNICATEDCASES
Respondent state: RUS
Articles of the Convention: 3;5;5-1;5-1-c;6;6-1;6-3-b;6-3-c;6-3-d;10;10-1;10-2;11;11-1;11-2
Represented by: TEREKHOV K. I. ; MIKHAYLOVA O. O.
Conclusion: Communicated
CASE OF NAVALNYY v. RUSSIA
Hearing: Navalnyy v. Russia (nos. 29580/12, 36847/12, 11252/13, 12317/13 and 43746/14) (Grand Chamber hearing, 2018-01-24 00:00:00)
Application no.: 36847/12
Document type: CHAMBER
Document date: 2017-02-02 00:00:00
ECLI: ECLI:CE:ECHR:2017:0202JUD002958012
Respondent state: RUS
Articles of the Convention: 5;5-1;6;6-1;11;11-1;11-2;41
Judges: Alena Poláčková;Branko Lubarda;Dmitry Dedov;Helen Keller;Helena Jäderblom;Luis López Guerra;Pere Pastor Vilanova
Represented by: TEREKHOV K. ; MIKHAYLOVA O.
Issue: Articles 19.3, 27.2 and 27.3 of the Code of the Administrative Offences
Strasbourg case-law cited: Berladir and Others v. Russia, no. 34202/06, § 38, 10 July 2012;Bukta and Others v. Hungary, no. 25691/04, § 34, ECHR 2007 III;Ezelin v. France, 26 April 1991, § 37, Series A no. 202;Fáber v. Hungary, no. 40721/08, § 49, 24 July 2012;Frumkin v. Russia, no. 74568/12, 5 January 2016;Giulia Manzoni v. Italy, 1 July 1997, § 25, Reports 1997 IV;Kasparov and Others v. Russia, no. 21613/07, 3 October 2013;Kudrevičius and Others v. Lithuania [GC], no. 37553/05, ECHR 2015;Malofeyeva v. Russia, no. 36673/04, 30 May 2013;Mikhaylova v. Russia, no. 46998/08, §§ 57-69, 19 November 2015;Navalnyy and Yashin v. Russia, no. 76204/11, 4 December 2014;Nemtsov v. Russia, no. 1774/11, § 83, 31 July 2014;;Novikova and Others v. Russia, nos. 25501/07, 57569/11, 80153/12, 5790/13 and 35015/13, 26 April 2016;Oya Ataman v. Turkey, no. 74552/01, § 42, ECHR 2006 XIV;Schwabe and M.G. v. Germany, nos. 8080/08 and 8577/08, § 101, ECHR 2011 (extracts);Volkov and Adamskiy v. Russia, nos. 7614/09 and 30863/10, §§ 68 and 71, 26 March 2015
Conclusion: Violation of Article 11 - Freedom of assembly and association (Article 11-1 - Freedom of peaceful assembly);Violation of Article 5 - Right to liberty and security (Article 5-1 - Lawful arrest or detention);No violation of Article 6 - Right to a fair trial (Article 6 - Administrative proceedings;Article 6-1 - Fair hearing);Violation of Article 6 - Right to a fair trial (Article 6 - Administrative proceedings;Article 6-1 - Fair hearing);Pecuniary damage - award (Article 41 - Pecuniary damage;Just satisfaction);Non-pecuniary damage - award (Article 41 - Non-pecuniary damage;Just satisfaction)
Separate opinion: TRUE
NAVALNYY v. RUSSIA and 4 other applications
Hearing: Navalnyy v. Russia (nos. 29580/12, 36847/12, 11252/13, 12317/13 and 43746/14) (Grand Chamber hearing, 2018-01-24 00:00:00)
Application no.: 36847/12
Document type: COMMUNICATEDCASES
Respondent state: RUS
Articles of the Convention: 3;5;5-1;5-1-c;6;6-1;6-3-b;6-3-c;6-3-d;10;10-1;10-2;11;11-1;11-2
Represented by: TEREKHOV K. I. ; MIKHAYLOVA O. O.
Conclusion: Communicated
CASE OF NAVALNYY v. RUSSIA
Hearing: Navalnyy v. Russia (nos. 29580/12, 36847/12, 11252/13, 12317/13 and 43746/14) (Grand Chamber hearing, 2018-01-24 00:00:00)
Application no.: 11252/13
Document type: CHAMBER
Document date: 2017-02-02 00:00:00
ECLI: ECLI:CE:ECHR:2017:0202JUD002958012
Respondent state: RUS
Articles of the Convention: 5;5-1;6;6-1;11;11-1;11-2;41
Judges: Alena Poláčková;Branko Lubarda;Dmitry Dedov;Helen Keller;Helena Jäderblom;Luis López Guerra;Pere Pastor Vilanova
Represented by: TEREKHOV K. ; MIKHAYLOVA O.
Issue: Articles 19.3, 27.2 and 27.3 of the Code of the Administrative Offences
Strasbourg case-law cited: Berladir and Others v. Russia, no. 34202/06, § 38, 10 July 2012;Bukta and Others v. Hungary, no. 25691/04, § 34, ECHR 2007 III;Ezelin v. France, 26 April 1991, § 37, Series A no. 202;Fáber v. Hungary, no. 40721/08, § 49, 24 July 2012;Frumkin v. Russia, no. 74568/12, 5 January 2016;Giulia Manzoni v. Italy, 1 July 1997, § 25, Reports 1997 IV;Kasparov and Others v. Russia, no. 21613/07, 3 October 2013;Kudrevičius and Others v. Lithuania [GC], no. 37553/05, ECHR 2015;Malofeyeva v. Russia, no. 36673/04, 30 May 2013;Mikhaylova v. Russia, no. 46998/08, §§ 57-69, 19 November 2015;Navalnyy and Yashin v. Russia, no. 76204/11, 4 December 2014;Nemtsov v. Russia, no. 1774/11, § 83, 31 July 2014;;Novikova and Others v. Russia, nos. 25501/07, 57569/11, 80153/12, 5790/13 and 35015/13, 26 April 2016;Oya Ataman v. Turkey, no. 74552/01, § 42, ECHR 2006 XIV;Schwabe and M.G. v. Germany, nos. 8080/08 and 8577/08, § 101, ECHR 2011 (extracts);Volkov and Adamskiy v. Russia, nos. 7614/09 and 30863/10, §§ 68 and 71, 26 March 2015
Conclusion: Violation of Article 11 - Freedom of assembly and association (Article 11-1 - Freedom of peaceful assembly);Violation of Article 5 - Right to liberty and security (Article 5-1 - Lawful arrest or detention);No violation of Article 6 - Right to a fair trial (Article 6 - Administrative proceedings;Article 6-1 - Fair hearing);Violation of Article 6 - Right to a fair trial (Article 6 - Administrative proceedings;Article 6-1 - Fair hearing);Pecuniary damage - award (Article 41 - Pecuniary damage;Just satisfaction);Non-pecuniary damage - award (Article 41 - Non-pecuniary damage;Just satisfaction)
Separate opinion: TRUE
NAVALNYY v. RUSSIA and 4 other applications
Hearing: Navalnyy v. Russia (nos. 29580/12, 36847/12, 11252/13, 12317/13 and 43746/14) (Grand Chamber hearing, 2018-01-24 00:00:00)
Application no.: 11252/13
Document type: COMMUNICATEDCASES
Respondent state: RUS
Articles of the Convention: 3;5;5-1;5-1-c;6;6-1;6-3-b;6-3-c;6-3-d;10;10-1;10-2;11;11-1;11-2
Represented by: TEREKHOV K. I. ; MIKHAYLOVA O. O.
Conclusion: Communicated