The case raises an issue under Article 3 of the Convention in so far as the State authorities did not ensure that the applicant – a special-needs prisoner – received necessary surgery and took more than a year to examine…
CASE OF GRZĘDA v. POLAND (European Court of Human Rights) 43572/18
The case concerns the lack of access to a court for the applicant in connection with the premature and allegedly arbitrary termination of his term of office as a judicial member of the National Council of the Judiciary. He relied…
OOO Memo v. Russia (European Court of Human Rights)
Information Note on the Court’s case-law 260 March 2022 OOO Memo v. Russia – 2840/10 Judgment 15.3.2022 [Section III]
Bjarki H. Diego v. Iceland – 30965/17 (European Court of Human Rights)
Information Note on the Court’s case-law 260 March 2022 Bjarki H. Diego v. Iceland – 30965/17 Judgment 15.3.2022 [Section III]
Communaute genevoise d’action syndicale (CGAS) v. Switzerland – 21881/20 (European Court of Human Rights)
Information Note on the Court’s case-law 260 March 2022 Communaute genevoise d’action syndicale (CGAS) v. Switzerland – 21881/20 Judgment 15.3.2022 [Section III]
Nikitina v. Russia – 8051/20 (European Court of Human Rights)
Information Note on the Court’s case-law 260 March 2022 Nikitina v. Russia – 8051/20 Judgment 15.3.2022 [Section III]
CASE OF OOO MEMO v. RUSSIA (European Court of Human Rights) 2840/10
The case concerns civil defamation proceedings brought by the Administration of the Volgograd Region against an Internet media outlet following the publication of an interview with a third party. The applicant company is the founder of Kavkazskiy Uzel («Кавказский узел»,…
CASE OF TETIK AND OTHERS v. TURKEY (European Court of Human Rights) 25885/19 and 37 others
The applications concern the non-enforcement of domestic courts’ decisions despite the Compensation Commission’s findings of breach of the applicants’ right to a fair trial.
CASE OF STRAISTĂ v. THE REPUBLIC OF MOLDOVA (European Court of Human Rights) 14191/14
The case concerns the authorities’ alleged failure to fulfil their positive obligation to protect the applicant against an on-going violation of her right to private life and to carry out an effective investigation into her complaints.
CASE OF IURCOVSCAIA AND PAVLOVSCHI v. THE REPUBLIC OF MOLDOVA (European Court of Human Rights) 74360/12 and 78119/14
The case concerns the interception of the applicants’ telephone communications in the framework of criminal proceedings against other persons. Both applicants complain of a violation of Article 8 of the Convention on account of the insufficient safeguards provided by domestic…