The case concerns the dissolution of the Bryansk and Tula Diocese of the Russian Orthodox Free Church (Брянско-Тульское Епархиальное управление Российской Православной Свободной Церкви)
CASE OF KOTLYAR v. RUSSIA (European Court of Human Rights) 38825/16 and 2 others
The case concerns the commission of migration law offences by the applicant in protest against what was perceived as Russia’s restrictive system of residence registration.
Kavala v. Türkiye [GC] (European Court of Human Rights)
Information Note on the Court’s case-law 264 July 2022 Kavala v. Türkiye [GC] – 28749/18 Judgment 11.7.2022 [GC]
CASE OF KAVALA v. TÜRKİYE (European Court of Human Rights) 28749/18
Under the terms of Article 46 § 4 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (“the Convention”), the Committee of Ministers referred to the Court, on 2 February 2022, the question whether the Republic of…
Tagiyeva v. Azerbaijan (European Court of Human Rights)
Information Note on the Court’s case-law 264 July 2022 Tagiyeva v. Azerbaijan – 72611/14 Judgment 7.7.2022 [Section V]
Chocholáč v. Slovakia (European Court of Human Rights)
Information Note on the Court’s case-law 264 July 2022 Chocholáč v. Slovakia – 81292/17 Judgment 7.7.2022 [Section I]
CASE OF MEDAK AND OTHERS v. BOSNIA AND HERZEGOVINA (European Court of Human Rights) 45689/21 and 3 others
The applicants complained of the excessive length of administrative proceedings. FOURTH SECTION CASE OF MEDAK AND OTHERS v. BOSNIA AND HERZEGOVINA
CASE OF FEKETE AND OTHERS v. HUNGARY (European Court of Human Rights) 44057/20 and 11 others
The applicants complained of the excessive length of civil proceedings. Some applicants also raised other complaints under the provisions of the Convention.
CASE OF HAOUARI v. HUNGARY (European Court of Human Rights) 29440/16
The application concerns the legal basis of the applicant’s detention with a view to deportation. It raises issues under Article 5 § 1 of the Convention.
CASE OF YEPIKHIN v. RUSSIA (European Court of Human Rights) 29389/19
The applicant alleged that he did not receive adequate medical care in detention and that there was no effective remedy in that regard. He also raised other complaints under the provisions of the Convention.