Information Note on the Court’s case-law 244 October 2020
Akbay and Others v. Germany (European Court of Human Rights)
Information Note on the Court’s case-law 244 October 2020
CASE OF KABANOVA v. UKRAINE (European Court of Human Rights) Application no. 17317/08
. The application concerns complaints under Articles 2 and 3 of the Convention regarding the ineffectiveness of the investigation into a traffic accident which the applicant survived, while sustaining bodily injuries.
CASE OF STARISHKO v. UKRAINE (European Court of Human Rights) Application no. 61839/12
. The applicant complained about the lack of any genuine prospect of his release and about the restrictions on his right to receive visits in prison from 2000 to 2014.
Just satisfaction claims – Practice direction issued by the President of the Court in accordance with Rule 32 of the Rules of Court on 28 March 2007
Just satisfaction claims I. Introduction 1. The award of just satisfaction is not an automatic consequence of a finding by the European Court of Human Rights
CASE OF MYASNIK MALKHASYAN v. ARMENIA (European Court of Human Rights) Application no. 49020/08
. The case concerns the applicant’s arrest and pre-trial detention, including whether his deprivation of liberty was based on a reasonable suspicion that he had committed an offence as required by Article 5 § 1 (c)
CASE OF KARAPETYAN v. GEORGIA (European Court of Human Rights) Application no. 61233/12
. The present case concerns the applicant’s complaint that the sanction of confiscation applied in respect of all the money which she had been transporting through Georgia in violation of her duty to declare
CASE OF GUZ v. POLAND (European Court of Human Rights) Application no. 965/12
. The applicant complained under Article 10 of the Convention that he had been found guilty of the disciplinary offence of undermining the dignity of the office of a judge.
CASE OF AKBAY AND OTHERS v. GERMANY (European Court of Human Rights) Application no. 40495/15 and 2 others
. The present case concerns the conviction of the first applicant’s husband (N.A.) and of the second and third applicants for drug offences committed in the context of a drugs importation on which the State had exerted influence.
CASE OF MUHAMMAD AND MUHAMMAD v. ROMANIA (European Court of Human Rights) Application no. 80982/12
GRAND CHAMBER CASE OF MUHAMMAD AND MUHAMMAD v. ROMANIA (Application no. 80982/12) JUDGMENT