Act XXIII of 1979 amending Chapter 158 of the Laws of Malta – Overview of the Case-law of the ECHR FIRST SECTION CASE OF RADMILLI v. MALTA (Application no. 28711/19) JUDGMENT STRASBOURG 13 January 2022
Category: European Court of Human Rights
CASE OF BORODAY AND OTHERS v. UKRAINE (European Court of Human Rights) 44274/13 and 2 others
The applicants alleged that they did not receive adequate medical care in detention. Some applicants also raised other complaints under the provisions of the Convention.
CASE OF PÓCZA AND OTHERS v. HUNGARY (European Court of Human Rights) 13353/21
The applicants complained of the excessive length of civil proceedings. FIRST SECTION CASE OF PÓCZA AND OTHERS v. HUNGARY (Application no. 13353/21)
CASE OF MARTYNYUK AND KOZMINA v. UKRAINE (European Court of Human Rights) 9493/21 and 18048/21
The applicants complained of the excessive length of civil proceedings and of the lack of any effective remedy in domestic law.
CASE OF RONTÓNÉ SZÉP AND OTHERS v. HUNGARY (European Court of Human Rights) 390/21
The applicants complained of the excessive length of civil proceedings. FIRST SECTION CASE OF RONTÓNÉ SZÉP AND OTHERS v. HUNGARY
CASE OF ECKERMANN v. HUNGARY (European Court of Human Rights) 52090/20 and 4 others
The applicants complained of the excessive length of civil proceedings. Some applicants also raised other complaints under Article 13 of the Convention.
CASE OF CORNEANU v. HUNGARY (European Court of Human Rights) 45021/20 and 9 others
The applicants complained of the excessive length of their pre-trial detention. Some applicants also raised other complaints under the provisions of the Convention.
CASE OF SAVINOCHKIN AND OTHERS v. UKRAINE (European Court of Human Rights) 39814/20 and 5 others
The applicants complained of the excessive length of criminal proceedings and of the lack of any effective remedy in domestic law.
CASE OF ZEJNELOVIĆ v. SERBIA (European Court of Human Rights) 26277/20
The applicant complained of the non-enforcement of a domestic decision given against socially/State-owned companies.
CASE OF KIRTOK v. UKRAINE (European Court of Human Rights) 26193/20 and 9489/21
The applicant complained of the excessive length of his pre-trial detention. He also raised other complaints under the provisions of the Convention.