Important Decisions

Judge in litigation against administrative courts! The refusal to examine proposed witnesses, the rejection of the requested oral hearing and the inadequate statement of reasons for the judgments violated the right to a fair trial.

JUDGMENT  Bileski v. North Macedonia 06.06.2019 (no. 78392/14) see here   SUMMARY  Violation of the fair trial by the administrative courts. Reasoning of  court judgments. Denial of examination of important witnesses. Dismissal of the oral hearing of the party. Alleged co-operation with the security services of the former Communist regime. In 2012, the Fact Verification Commission […]

read more

Judge impartiality. Participation in court panel, which examined bank executives, a judge whose son was a legal advisor to the same bank, raises suspicions of a lack of impartiality. Failure to examine a witness that was not essential does not violate the fair trial.

JUDGMENT Sigurður Einarsson and others v. Iceland 04.06.19 (no. 39757/15)  see here  SUMMARY  Impartiality  ofJudge and fair trial. Not examination of witness that was not  essential. The conditions for ensuring fair trial are, inter alia, the impartiality of the judge, access to evidence and the examination of witnesses. The applicants, senior executives at Kaupping Bank, […]

read more

First Strasbourg ruling on non-compliance by a state with a ruling by the European Court of Human Rights. Breach of the State’s obligation to enforce the decision.

JUDGMENT Ilgar Mammadov v. Azerbaijan  29.05.2019 (no. 15172/13) see here THE IMPORTANCE OF THE CASE The decision is important as it is the first ECtHR decision not to execute its decision by a member state of the Council of Europe. In accordance with Article 46 of the ECHR, the judgments of the Court are binding […]

read more

The continuing case-law differentiation between the Chambers and the plenary session of the Council of State on the same subject violates the principle of legal certainty and fair trial

JUDGMENT  Sine Tsaggarakis A.E.E. v. Greece 23-05-19 (no. 17257/13) see here SUMMARY The case concerned divergences between the case-law of the Fourth and Fifth Sections of the Greek Supreme Administrative Court and also between the plenary Supreme Administrative Court and its Fourth Section. The proceedings concerned an application for judicial review brought by the applicant […]

read more

The inability of social welfare authorities to provide appropriate help to overcome the children’s refusal to communicate with their father violated the right to respect for family life

JUDGMENT A.V. v. Slovenia 09.04.2019 ​​(no. 878/13) see here SUMMARY Father and child communication. Negative attitude of children to get in touch with their father. Judicial deprivation of the father of three children of his right to communicate with them. Ineffectiveness of the work of social welfare authorities that failed to ensure safe support of […]

read more

The state has to execute its irrevocable court decisions for damages without requiring further procedures for their execution

JUDGMENT Arnaboldi v. Italy 14.03.2019 (no. 43422/07) see here SUMMARY Non-execution of a court decision. Expropriation of property for the construction of a road. The applicant’s inability to obtain the indemnity finally granted to him by the national court. According to the Court, the refusal of the authorities to take the necessary measures to comply […]

read more

Judicial and private expert report. Taking into account by the courts of the expert report of the psychiatrist appointed by the authorities and the rejection of the report of the private psychiatrist violated the principle of equality of arms by creating an unfair disadvantage against the accused

JUDGMENT Hodžić v. Croatia 04.04.2019 (no. 28932/14) see here SUMMARY The case concerned the proceedings for the applicant’s confinement in a psychiatric hospital. The Court found in particular that, without obtaining another expert report addressing Mr Hodžić’s objections or giving him an opportunity to examine an “expert” on his behalf, his possibility to challenge the […]

read more

Children’s refusal to return to their mother and their manipulation by the father does not exempt the authorities from taking the necessary measures to restore family ties. Failure to enforce judgments for custody violates the right to family life.

JUDGMENT  R.Ι. and others v. Romania 4.12.2018 (no. 57077/16) see here SUMMARY  The case concerned a woman who was given custody of her two children but who was not able to enforce the orders, which left the children with the father. While accepting that the authorities had been placed in a difficult position given opposition […]

read more

The 13-year-old child has the right to choose with whom he will stay and who will have his custody. Assignment of custody to grandparents after the death of the mother and not to the indifferent father is compatible with the ECHR

JUDGMENT Khusnutdinov and X. v. Russia  18.12.2018 (no. 76598/12) see here   SUMMARY The case concerned a child residence dispute. The Court reiterated that as soon as children become mature, the courts should give due weight to their views and feelings and to their right to respect for their private life. Given that Mr Khusnutdinov’s […]

read more

Χρησιμοποιούμε cookies για να σας προσφέρουμε καλύτερη εμπειρία στο διαδίκτυο. Συμφωνώντας, αποδέχεστε τη χρήση των cookies σύμφωνα με την Πολιτική Cookies.

Privacy Settings saved!
Ρυθμίσεις Απορρήτου

Όταν επισκέπτεστε μία ιστοσελίδα, μπορεί να λάβει κάποιες βασικές πληροφορίες από τον browser σας, κατά βάση υπό τη μορφή cookies. Εδώ μπορείτε να ρυθμίσετε τη συγκατάθεσή σας σε όλα αυτά.

These cookies allow us to count visits and traffic sources, so we can measure and improve the performance of our site.

We track anonymized user information to improve our website.
  • _ga
  • _gid
  • _gat

Decline all Services
Accept all Services