CASE OF CATAN AND OTHERS v. THE REPUBLIC OF MOLDOVA AND RUSSIA
Hearing: Catan and Others v. Republic of Moldova and Russia (no. 43370/04, 43370/04, 8252/05 and 18454/06) (Grand Chamber hearing, 2012-01-25 00:00:00)
Application no.: 8252/05
Document type: GRANDCHAMBER
Document date: 2012-10-19 00:00:00
ECLI: ECLI:CE:ECHR:2012:1019JUD004337004
Respondent state: MDA;RUS
Articles of the Convention: 1;35;41;P1-2
Judges: Anatoly Kovler;David Thór Björgvinsson;Dean Spielmann;Egbert Myjer;Françoise Tulkens;Helen Keller;Isabelle Berro-Lefèvre;Ján Šikuta;Josep Casadevall;Karel Jungwiert;Lech Garlicki;Ledi Bianku;Mark Villiger;Mihai Poalelungi;Mirjana Lazarova Trajkovska;Nicolas Bratza
Represented by: POSTICA A. ; MANOLE I. ; HUGHES P. ; DUFFY H.
Issue: Article 6 of the Moldavian Republic of Transdniestria Law on languages
Strasbourg case-law cited: Al-Adsani v. the United Kingdom [GC], no. 35763/97, § 55, ECHR 2001-XI;Al-Skeini and Others v. the United Kingdom [GC], no. 55721/07, 7 July 2011;Artico v. Italy, 13 May 1980, § 33, Series A no. 37;Assanidze v. Georgia [GC], no. 71503/01, § 139, ECHR 2004-II;Austin and Others v. the United Kingdom [GC], nos. 39692/09, 40713/09 and 41008/09, § 54, 15 March 2012;Bankovic and Others v. Belgium and 16 Other Contracting States [GC] (dec.), no. 52207/99, ECHR 2001- XII;Case “relating to certain aspects of the laws on the use of languages in education in Belgium”, judgment of 23 July 1968, Series A no. 6, §§ 3-5;Catan and Others v. Moldova and Russia (dec.), nos. 43370/04, 8252/05 and 18454/06, § 108, 15 June 2010;Cyprus v. Turkey [GC], no. 25781/94, ECHR 2001-IV;Demir and Baykara v. Turkey [GC], no. 34503/97, § 67, ECHR 2008;Folgerø and Others v. Norway [GC], no. 15472/02, § 84, ECHR 2007-III;Ilascu and Others v. Moldova and Russia [GC], no. 48787/99, ECHR 2004-VII;Ivantoc and Others v. Moldova and Russia, no. 23687/05, §§ 105-111, 15 November 2011;Kjeldsen, Busk Madsen and Pedersen v. Denmark, judgment of 7 December 1976, Series A no. 23;Lautsi and Others v. Italy [GC], no. 30814/06, ECHR 2011 (extracts);Leyla Sahin v. Turkey [GC], no. 44774/98, §§ 134 and 136, ECHR 2005-XI;Loizidou v. Turkey (merits), 18 December 1996, Reports of Judgments and Decisions 1996-VI;Loizidou v. Turkey (preliminary objections), 23 March 1995, § 62, Series A no. 310;Podkolzina v. Latvia, no. 46726/99, § 36, ECHR 2002-II;Ponomaryovi v. Bulgaria, no. 5335/05, § 56, ECHR 2011;Rantsev v. Cyprus and Russia, no. 25965/04, §§ 273-274, ECHR 2010 (extracts);Saadi v. Italy [GC], no. 37201/06, § 128, ECHR 2008;Saadi v. the United Kingdom [GC], no. 13229/03, § 62, ECHR 2008-...;Sampanis and Others v. Greece, no. 32526/05, 5 June 2008;Soering v. the United Kingdom, 7 July 1989, § 86, Series A no. 161;Stec and Others v. the United Kingdom (dec.) [GC], nos. 65731/01 and 65900/01, § 48, ECHR 2005-X;Timishev v. Russia, nos. 55762/00 and 55974/00, § 64, ECHR 2005-XI
External sources: Annual Report for 2004 of the Organisation for Security and Co-operation in Europe;Universal Declaration of Human Rights;Convention against Discrimination in Education;International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights;International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination;Convention on the Rights of the Child
Conclusion: Preliminary objection dismissed;Remainder inadmissible;No violation of Article 2 of Protocol No. 1 - Right to education-{general} (Article 2 of Protocol No. 1 - Right to education) (the Republic of Moldova);Violation of Article 2 of Protocol No. 1 - Right to education-{general} (Article 2 of Protocol No. 1 - Respect for parents' philosophical convictions;Right to education) (Russia);Non-pecuniary damage - award
Separate opinion: TRUE