CASE OF LOPES DE SOUSA FERNANDES v. PORTUGAL
Hearing: Lopes de Sousa Fernandes v. Portugal (no. 56080/13) (Grand Chamber hearing, 2016-11-16 00:00:00)
Application no.: 56080/13
Document type: GRANDCHAMBER
Document date: 2017-12-19 00:00:00
ECLI: ECLI:CE:ECHR:2017:1219JUD005608013
Respondent state: PRT
Articles of the Convention: 2;2-1;35;35-3-a;41
Judges: Alena Poláčková;András Sajó;Angelika Nußberger;Ganna Yudkivska;Georgios A. Serghides;Guido Raimondi;Helen Keller;Krzysztof Wojtyczek;Linos-Alexandre Sicilianos;Luis López Guerra;Mirjana Lazarova Trajkovska;Nebojša Vučinić;Nona Tsotsoria;Pauliine Koskelo;Paulo Pinto De Albuquerque;Robert Spano;Vincent A. De Gaetano;Yonko Grozev;Gabriele Kucsko-Stadlmayer;Ksenija Turković;Pere Pastor Vilanova
Represented by: SÁ FERNANDES R.
Issue: Article 64 of the Portuguese Constitution ; Health Act approved by virtue of Law no. 48/90 of 24 August 1990 ; Legislative Decree no. 11/93 of 15 January 1993 which approved the National Health-care System Regulations ; Hospital Management Act established by Legislative Decree no. 19/88 of 21 January 1988 and in force until 2002 ; General Regulations on Hospitals approved by Order no. 48358 of 27 April 1968 ; Legislative Decree no. 291/93 of 24 August 1993 ; Medical Association Statute adopted by Legislative Decree no. 282/77 of 5 July 1977 ; Article 3 of the Disciplinary Regulations for Doctors approved by Legislative Decree no. 217/94 of 20 August 1994 ; Code of Ethics ; Infectious-Diseases Control Plan (1988-98) - Instruction issued by the Directorate General for Health on 23 October 1996 which approved the infectious-diseases control commissions ; National Infectious-Diseases Control Programme adopted on 14 May 1999 which replaced the Infectious-Diseases Control Plan (1988-98)
Strasbourg case-law cited: Altuğ and Others v. Turkey, no. 32086/07, § 73, 30 June 2015;Arskaya v. Ukraine, no. 45076/05, 5 December 2013;Asiye Genç v. Turkey, no. 24109/07, 27 January 2015;Aydoğdu v. Turkey, no. 40448/06, 30 August 2016;Bajić v. Croatia, no. 41108/10, § 90, 13 November 2012;Balcı v. Turkey (dec.), no. 58194/10, § 45, 20 October 2015;Bedir v. Turkey (dec.), no. 25070/02, 2 October 2007;Beiere v. Latvia, no. 30954/05, § 38, 29 November 2011;Besen v. Turkey (dec.), no.  48915/09, § 38 in fine, 19 June 2012;Bilbija and Blažević v. Croatia, no. 62870/13, § 107, 12 January 2016;Blokhin v. Russia [GC], no. 47152/06, § 106, ECHR 2016;Bouyid v. Belgium [GC], no. 23380/09, § 55, ECHR 2015;Buksa v. Poland (dec.), no. 75749/13, § 13, 31 May 2016;Byrzykowski v. Poland, no. 11562/05, § 105, 27 June 2006;Calvelli and Ciglio v. Italy [GC], no. 32967/96, ECHR 2002 I;Centre for Legal Resources on behalf of Valentin Câmpeanu v. Romania [GC], no. 47848/08, ECHR 2014;Cevrioğlu v. Turkey, no. 69546/12, §§ 54-55, 4 October 2016;Cyprus v. Turkey [GC], no. 25781/94, § 219, ECHR 2001 IV;Dodov v. Bulgaria, no. 59548/00, § 86, 17 January 2008;E.M. and Others v. Romania (dec.), no. 20192/07, § 50, 3 June 2014;Elena Cojocaru v. Romania, no. 74114/12, 22 March 2016;Eugenia Lazăr v. Romania, no. 32146/05, §§ 69-70, 16 February 2010;Fernie v. the United Kingdom (dec.), no. 14881/04, 5 January 2006;Gheorghe v. Romania (dec.), no. 19215/04, 22 September 2005;Glass v. the United Kingdom, (dec.), no. 61827/00, 18 March 2003;Gregačević v. Croatia, no. 58331/09, § 35, 10 July 2012;Hizb ut-tahrir and Others v. Germany (dec.), no. 31098/08, §§ 58-59, 12 June 2012;Hristozov and Others v. Bulgaria, nos. 47039/11 and 358/12, § 108, ECHR 2012 (extracts);Jeronovičs v. Latvia [GC], no. 44898/10, § 75, ECHR 2016;Jørgensen and Others v. Denmark (dec.), no. 30173/12, § 63, 28 June 2016;Karácsony and Others v. Hungary [GC], no. 42461/13, § 179, ECHR 2016 (extracts);Karpisiewicz v. Poland (dec.), no. 14730/09, 11 December 2012;Kudra v. Croatia, no. 13904/07, § 107, 18 December 2012;Lambert and Others v. France [GC], no. 46043/14, § 140, ECHR 2015 (extracts);M. v. Turkey, no. 4050/10 (dec), 15 October 2013;Mehmet Şentürk and Bekir Şentürk v. Turkey, no. 13423/09, §§ 104-105, ECHR 2013;Mihu v. Romania, no. 36903/13, §§ 67-68, 1 March 2016;Mocanu and Others v. Romania [GC], nos. 10865/09, 45886/07 and 32431/08, § 260, ECHR 2014 (extracts);Muršić v. Croatia [GC], no. 7334/13, § 69, ECHR 2016;Musayeva and Others v. Russia (dec.), no. 74239/01, 1 June 2006;Nagmetov v. Russia [GC], no. 35589/08, § 62, 30 March 2017;Narin v. Turkey, no. 18907/02, § 49, 15 December 2009;Nitecki v. Poland (dec.), no. 65653/01, 21 March 2002;O’Keeffe v. Ireland [GC], no. 35810/09, § 121, ECHR 2014 (extracts);Oyal v. Turkey, no. 4864/05, § 54, 23 March 2010;Panaitescu v. Romania, no. 30909/06, 10 April 2012;Pentiacova and Others v. Moldova (dec.), no. 14462/03, ECHR 2005 I;Perdigão v. Portugal [GC], no. 24768/06, § 87, 16 November 2010;Petrović v. Serbia, no. 40485/08, § 60, 15 July 2014;Počkajevs v. Latvia (dec.), no. 76774/01, 21 October 2004;Powell v. the United Kingdom (dec.), no. 45305/99, ECHR 2000 V;Rezgui v. France (dec.), no. 49859/99, ECHR 2000-XI;Rinkūnienė v. Lithuania (dec.), no. 55779/08, 1 December 2009;Roman Zakharov v. Russia [GC], no. 47143/06, § 164, ECHR 2015;Sabri Güneş v. Turkey [GC], no. 27396/06, § 29, 29 June 2012;Sayan v. Turkey, no. 81277/12, §§ 111-12, 11 October 2016;Schatschaschwili v. Germany [GC], no. 9154/10, § 167, ECHR 2015;Sevim Güngör v. Turkey (dec.), no. 75173/01, 14 April 2009;Sieminska v. Poland, no. 37602/97, 29 March 2001;Šilih v. Slovenia [GC], no. 71463/01, § 192, 9 April 2009;Skraskowski v. Poland (dec.), no. 36420/97, 6 April 2000;Slimani v. France, no. 57671/00, ECHR 2004 IX (extracts);Spyra and Kranczkowski v. Poland, no. 19764/07, § 88, 25 September 2012;Trzepalko v. Poland (dec.), no. 25124/09, § 24, 13 September 2011;Vasileva v. Bulgaria, no. 23796/10, § 63, 17 March 2016;Vo v. France [GC], no. 53924/00, ECHR 2004 VIII;Wiater v. Poland (dec.), no. 42290/08, § 39, 15 May 2012;Z v. Poland, no. 46132/08, §§ 110-12, 13 November 2012;Zafer Öztürk v. Turkey, no. 25774/09, § 46, 21 July 2015
External sources: Recommendation no. R (84) 20 of the Council of Europe concerning the control of infectious diseases
Conclusion: Preliminary objection joined to merits and dismissed (Art. 35) Admissibility criteria;(Art. 35-3-a) Manifestly ill-founded;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