The application concerns a unilaterally imposed lease under Act XXIII of 1979 amending Chapter 158 of the Laws of Malta (‘the Ordinance’) affecting the applicant company’s property at 18 St. Joseph High street, Ħamrun, as of June 2007. At that…
CASE OF ABELA v. MALTA – 825/21. The application concerns a unilaterally imposed lease under Act XXIII of 1979 amending Chapter 158 of the Laws of Malta (the Ordinance), on the applicant’s property
The application concerns a unilaterally imposed lease under Act XXIII of 1979 amending Chapter 158 of the Laws of Malta (the Ordinance), on the applicant’s property, no. 1 Cordina Lane, St. Paul’s area, Cospicua, which he acquired following inheritance and…
CASE OF MARTINELLI AND OTHERS v. MALTA – 788/21. The case concerns the applicants’ property in Naxxar which has since 1945 been rented out, as a club, under Chapter 69 of the Laws of Malta, to the Naxxar Lions Football club
The case concerns the applicants’ property in Naxxar which has since 1945 been rented out, as a club, under Chapter 69 of the Laws of Malta, to the Naxxar Lions Football club. At the time it was rented out at…
CASE OF GALEA AND BORG v. MALTA – 50473/20. The case concerns an imposed lease as a result of the application of Chapter 69 of the Laws of Malta on the applicants
The case concerns an imposed lease as a result of the application of Chapter 69 of the Laws of Malta on the applicants’ property at 100/6 Nicolo’ Isuard Street, Sliema. The first applicant is the bare owner of the entire…
CASE OF GRIMA AND OTHERS v. MALTA – 18057/20
The applicants (who are members of the Grima and Parnis England families) co-own the property at no. 35 Dingli street, Sliema. By means of Act XXIII of 1979 amending Chapter 158 of the Laws of Malta, the tenant maintained occupation…
CASE OF BONNICI AND OTHERS v. MALTA – 15217/20. The case concerns a unilaterally imposed lease under Act XXIII of 1979 amending the Housing Ordinance
The case concerns a unilaterally imposed lease under Act XXIII of 1979 amending the Housing (Decontrol) Ordinance (‘the Ordinance’), Chapter 158 of the Laws of Malta, affecting the applicants’ property in Gżira as of 25 February 2001. The three applicants…
CASE OF KITANOVSKA AND TRAJKOVSKI v. NORTH MACEDONIA – The obligation to pay a private heat supplier a standing charge introduced by the State had violated the peaceful enjoyment of their possessions (flats)
The applications concern the applicants’ complaint that the obligation to pay a private heat supplier a standing charge introduced by the State had violated the peaceful enjoyment of their possessions (flats) under Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 to the…
CASE OF CUPI v. ALBANIA – 27187/08. No one can be convicted based on statements made without a lawyer
The applicant complained under Article 6 §§ 1 and 3 (c) of the Convention that he was convicted on the grounds of statements made without a lawyer. The European Court of Human Rights notes the following: The applicant’s right not…
CASE OF ROBULET v. THE REPUBLIC OF MOLDOVA – The court cannot consider a late appeal without extending the time limit for filing an appeal and without giving reasons
The case concerns the alleged breach of the principle of “legal certainty” protected by Article 6 § 1 of the Convention owing to the domestic courts’ examination of a late appeal of the opposing party without giving any reasons and…
CASE OF JANAKIESKI v. NORTH MACEDONIA – The difficulties involved in dealing with the applicant’s numerous appeals, as well as the COVID-19 pandemic, do not justify failure to comply with the “speediness” requirement set out in Article 5 § 4 of the Convention
The present case concerns the alleged unlawfulness and arbitrariness of the applicant’s deprivation of liberty, lack of relevant and sufficient reasons for his deprivation of liberty and lack of a speedy review of his deprivation of liberty, in breach of…