Private life

Inaction of authorities to protect residents from noise coming from a police station. Violation of the right to respect for privacy and residence

JUDGMENT
Yevgeniy Dmitriyev v. Russia 01.12.2020 (app. no.  17840/06)
Noise protection. Right to respect for privacy and peaceful enjoyment of home.
The applicant appealed to the national courts for harassment from the emission of various noises due to the installation of a police station and detention center in the basement of his apartment building. Prior to appealing to the Court, he had complained in writing to the competent authorities but his complaint was not considered. Although the national courts ruled that the police station should be relocated, the decision was not enforced. He brought an action for violation of the right to privacy and residence.
The Cound that the day-to-day operations of the police department had directly interfered with the applicant’s rights under Article 8 of the Convention, due to excessive noise and insufficient measures 13 years and either were not effective or were not taken at all.

read more

The dismissal of a teacher who taught Serbian in a Croatian school violated the right to privacy

JUDGMENT
Mile Novaković v. Croatia 17.12.2020 (app. no. 73544/14)
The case concerned a teacher’s complaint about being dismissed in 1999 for giving his classes in
Serbian rather than in Croatian. Of Serb ethnicity, he had lived and worked in Croatia for most of his
professional life and at the time of his dismissal was working at a secondary school in Eastern
Slavonia, in an area which had been peacefully reintegrated into Croatian territory after the war. The
authorities held in particular that he could not be expected to learn Croatian, given that he was
55 years old at the time.
The Court ruled that the authorities had dismissed the teacher, without considering any alternatives
such as training. Relying solely on his age and years of service, the authorities had applied the most
severe sanction, thereby significantly interfering with his rights.

read more

Insufficient judicial control regarding a measure of dismissal of an official in a public body imposed after the failure of a military coup in Turkey. Violation of the ECHR

JUDGMENT
Pişkin v, Turkey 15.12.2020 (app. no. 33399/18)
The case concerned Mr Pişkin’s dismissal on the grounds that he had links with a terrorist
organisation, in the wake of the declaration of a state of emergency in Turkey following the failed
military coup of 15 July 2016, as well as the subsequent judicial review of that measure.
Mr Pişkin complained that neither the procedure leading to his dismissal nor the subsequent judicial
proceedings had complied with the guarantees of a fair trial. He also complained that he had been
branded a “terrorist” and “traitor”.

read more

Deportation for sexual assault on a minor. A proportional measure according to the ECHR.

JUDGMENT
M.M. v. Switzerland 8.12.2020 (app. no. 59006/18)
The case concerned the applicant’s expulsion from Switzerland for a period of five years following
the imposition of a 12-month suspended prison sentence for having committed acts of a sexual
nature against a child and consumed narcotics.
The Court recognised that the cantonal courts and the Federal Supreme Court had carried out a
serious assessment of the applicant’s personal situation and the various interests at stake. These
authorities had thus had very solid arguments in favour of the applicant’s expulsion from
Switzerland for a limited duration. In consequence, the Court concluded that the interference had
been proportionate to the legitimate aim pursued and had been necessary in a democratic society,
within the meaning of the Convention.

read more

Strasbourg for the first time against the coronavirus! Inadmissible application for omissions and inadequate handling of the health crisis due to Covid-19, without the plaintiff being a victim!

JUDGMENT
Le Mailloux v. France 03.12.2020 (app. no. 18108/20)
The case concerned the applicant’s objections to the handling by the French State of the Covid-19
health crisis.
The Court observed that the applicant was complaining about the measures taken by the French State to curb the propagation of the Covid-19 virus among the whole population of France, but had not shown how he was personally affected. It reiterated that it did not recognise an actio popularis:
meaning that applicants cannot complain about a provision of domestic law, a domestic practice or
public acts simply because they appear to contravene the European Convention on Human Rights. In
order for applicants to be able to claim to be a victim, they must produce reasonable and convincing
evidence of the likelihood that a violation affecting them personally will occur.
The application was thus incompatible with the European Convention.

read more

The surreptitiously taken photos of the applicant who was the Party Chairman partner at her exit from the hospital violated the respect for private life

JUDGMENT
Dupate v. Latvia 19.11.2020 (app. no. 18068/11)
Photographes taken secretly of mother and newborn child as they leave the maternity clinic and their publication in the media. The applicant was the partner of the President of a political party, who was a public figure. Right to the protection of the privacy of the mother. Balancing privacy and freedom of expression.

read more

The deportation of a homosexual to Gambia without assessing the dangers he faced because of his sexual orientation in that country constitutes degrading treatment

JUDGMENT
B. and C. v. Switzerland 17.11.2020 (app. no. 43987/16 and  889/19)
Same-sex couple. One of the two partners was in danger of returning to Gambia after his partner’s application was rejected by the Swiss authorities for family reunification. He claimed that he was in danger of being mistreated if he returned.

read more

Violation of the privacy of a man who claims to be the biological father of a child, after unsuccessful attempts to acknowledge his paternity

JUDGMENT Koychev v. Bulgaria 15.10.2020 (app. no. 32495/15) see here SUMMARY In this case, the applicant (Mr Koychev) claimed to be the biological father of a child born outside marriage, and complained of the fact that his actions to have his paternity recognised had been rejected on the grounds that the child had been recognised […]

read more
ECHRCaseLaw

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