JUDGMENT Georgouleas and Nestoras v. Greece 28.5.2020 (no. 44612/13 and 45831/13) see here SUMMARY Maintaining the proper functioning of the capital market. The plaintiffs as stockbrokers with methodical transactions on the share of the company DΚ, which were all carried out through specific stock exchanges, formed in a methodical way, the price and marketability of […]
JUDGMENT Kadagishvili v. Georgia 14.05.2020 ( no. 12391/06) see here SUMMARY Failure to provide medical care to detainees in accordance with their health problems is inhumane and degrading treatment. Detention of detainees and conditions of a fair trial. The first and third applicants were convicted of money laundering and held in high-security prisons. They […]
JUDGMENT Platini v. Switzerland 05.03.2020 (no. 526/18) see here SUMMARY The case concerned Michel Platini, a former professional football player, president of UEFA and vice-president of FIFA. Disciplinary proceedings had been brought against him in respect of a salary “supplement” of 2 million Swiss francs (CHF), received in 2011 in the context of a verbal […]
Overturning an acquittal decision by a court of last instance based on an expert opinion. Non-infringement of fair trial.
JUDGMENT Marilena-Carmen Popa v. Romania 18.02.2020 (no. 1814/11) see here SUMMARY The case concerned criminal proceedings against the applicant for forgery. The Court found in particular that the Court of Cassation, the court of last instance in the case, had found the applicant guilty of an act of forgery, overturning a first-instance acquittal. The Court […]
Infringement of fair trial by lack of reasoning by the Court of Cassation for non-recognition of the benefit of mitigating circumstances.
JUDGMENT Felloni v. Italy 06.02.2020 (no. 44221/14) see here SUMMARY The case concerned criminal proceedings which led to Mr Felloni’s conviction for driving while unfit through drink. Mr Felloni alleged that his prison sentence was the result of the retrospective application of harsher criminal legislation. In particular, he complained that he had not been granted […]
Yukos affair and Putin statements. A series of violations against the accused. Multiple Russian condemnation of ECHR violations
JUDGMENT Khodorkovskiy and Lebedev v. Russia 14.01.2020 (n. 2) (appl. no. 51111/07 and 42757/07) see here SUMMARY The case concerned the second trial of former Yukos executives Mikhail Khodorkovskiy and Platon Lebedev. The European Court of Human Rights held unanimously that there had been breaches of the applicants’ right to a fair trial under Article […]
The long-term ban on leaving the country has more serious consequences than that on a sitizen and violated the right to privacy. Extensive interpretation of criminal law and non-application of a more specific provision infringed Article 7 of the ECHR
JUDGMENT Parmak and Bakir v. Turkey 3.12.2019 (no. 22429/07 and 25195/07) see here SUMMARY Legislative gap, broad interpretation of criminal law and proportionality principle. The applicants were charged with being involved with a terrorist organization and were banned from leaving the country only after their sentence had been imposed. Due to a legislative gap in […]
Request for the replacement of the sentence in the context of the transfer of detainees from Morocco to France. The principle “no punishment without law” does not apply to the enforcement of the sentence.
JUDGMENT Robert v. France 26/09/2019 (no. 1652/16) see here SUMMARY Execution of sentence and principle of “nulla poena sine lege”. Replacement of the sentence issued by the Moroccan courts for a French prisoner in the course of his transfer to France in order to serve his sentence. The Court held in particular that Articles 6 […]
JUDGMENT Rola v. Slovenia 04.06.2019 (no. 12096/14) see here SUMMARY Revocation of a license and deprivation of profession. Liquidator ‘s complaint that his permission to act in bankruptcy proceedings after his conviction for violent behavior was revoked. The revocation had interfered with the peaceful enjoyment of his property because he was no longer entitled to exercise […]
Genocide! The Court did not condemn the condemned for genocide, since he could foresee both the offense and his punishment
JUDGMENT Drėlingas v. Lithuania 12.03.2019 (no. 28859/16) see here SUMMARY The case concerned the applicant’s conviction for genocide for taking part in a 1956 operation to arrest two partisans who had resisted Soviet rule. The Court concluded that Lithuania’s Supreme Court had now resolved previously existing legal discrepancies in domestic practice on such genocide trials, […]