JUDGMENT Société Editrice de Mediapart and others . France 14.01.2021 (app. no. 281/15 and no. 34445/15) see here SUMMARY The two cases concerned an order issued against Mediapart, a news website, its publishing editor and a journalist to remove from the news company’s website audio extracts and transcripts of illegal recordings made at the home […]
JUDGMENT Munir Johana v. Denmark (app. no. 56803/18) and Khan v. Denmark (no 26957/19) see here and here SUMMARY Deportation and criminal convictions. Deportation of the applicants from Denmark and a six-year ban on their re-entry following repeated convictions for various criminal offenses, despite the fact that they had lived there from a young age. […]
JUDGMENT Cristina Maria Albuquerque Fernandes v. Portugal 12.01.2021 ( app.no. 50160/13) see here SUMMARY The case concerned disciplinary proceedings brought against Ms Albuquerque Fernandes, at the close of which the High Council of the Judiciary (HCJ) decided to impose compulsory retirement, and the ensuing judicial proceedings. Ms Albuquerque Fernandes accused the Constitutional Court of showing […]
JUDGMENT Shlykov and others v. Russia 19.01.2021 (app. no. 78638/11) see here SUMMARY Handcuffs on detainees each time they came out of their cells. The first applicant, in addition, complained about his detention conditions and two other applicants complained about their inability to access legal proceedings to complain about the handcuffs. According to the ECtHR, […]
JUDGMENT Dickinson v. Turkey 02.02.2021 (app. no. 25200/11) see here SUMMARY Collage exhibition in public places against Erdogan. Freedom of expression, political criticism and proportionality of intervention. The applicant, a British national who has been a professor at Istanbul University for more than 20 years, exhibited in a public event and in a courtroom a […]
GRAND CHAMBER JUDGMENT X and others v. Bulgaria 2.2.2021 (no. 22457/16) see here SUMMARY The case concerned allegations of sexual abuse committed against three children in a Bulgarian orphanage prior to their adoption by an Italian couple in June 2012, the European Court of Human Rights held : – that the applicants, owing to their […]
JUDGMENT Terna v. Italy 14.01.2021 (no. 21052/18) see here SUMMARY Right of family life of grandmother – granddaughter and ethnic discrimination The applicant is a Roma national. She was assigned custody of her minor granddaughter when the girl’s parents were jailed for serious offenses. With various court proceedings under the supervision of the competent Judge, […]
JUDGMENT
M.L. v. Norway 22.12.2020 (app. no. 64639/16)
Inadequacy of a mother to raise her child for psychological reasons. Removal of parental responsibility from the mother. Approval of adoption of her daughter by foster parents, to whom she was placed from the age of 9 days. The domestic authorities based the adoption decision, mainly on the absence of ties between the biological mother and daughter and on her attachment to the foster parents.
According to the ECtHR, although the relationship between the biological mother and daughter was very limited, the placement of the latter in a foster family when she was only 9 days old had left no room for them to develop any real relationship. The ECtHR also pointed out that the applicant’s very limited rights of communication with her daughter (four times a year, for 2 hours at a time) had been decided on the grounds that the parental decision was to be long-term. There was no indication that the domestic authorities had taken any real steps to reconsider the right of communication while the child was in a foster family.
JUDGMENT
Béla Németh v. Hungary 17.12.2020 (app. no. 73303/14)
The case concerned the applicant’s not being able to take possession of a property he had bought
owing to a legal moratorium on evictions. State bodies had been exempt from the moratorium. He
had had to wait two years before ultimately being able to exercise his ownership rights.
The Court found that the moratorium had had a basis in law, had served a legitimate interest, and, in
particular, had not deprived him of his legitimate expectation regarding ownership of the property,
merely delayed it.
The Court also found that the applicant’s situation had not been comparable to that of State actors
and as such he had suffered no discrimination
JUDGMENT
Gröning v. Germany 2.11.2020 (app. no. 71591/17)
The case concerned a complaint by a former member of the SS about the length of the criminal
proceedings against him for assisting in murder in the Auschwitz extermination camp.
The applicant was questioned in 1978 while being investigated by the Frankfurt public prosecutor’s
office for crimes committed when serving in the Auschwitz extermination camp. The investigation
was discontinued in 1985. The applicant was questioned again in 2014 after the the Hannover public
prosecutor’s office initiated an investigation and he was convicted in 2015. He argued that the
proceedings had been running since 1978 because the authorities had failed to notify him of the
discontinuation decision in 1985, making the proceedings excessively lengthy.
Χρησιμοποιούμε cookies για να σας προσφέρουμε καλύτερη εμπειρία στο διαδίκτυο. Συμφωνώντας, αποδέχεστε τη χρήση των cookies σύμφωνα με την Πολιτική Cookies.
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.