JUDGMENT L.B. v. Hungary 12.01.2021 (app. no. 36345/16) see here SUMMARY Privacy, publicity of public debtors on the internet, personal data and public interest. The applicant brought an action for violation of his privacy under Article 8 of the ECHR because the tax authority published tax lists on the internet with his personal data as […]
JUDGMENT Usmanov v. Russia 22.12.2020 (app. no. 43936/18) see here SUMMARY The case concerned a national of Tajikstan’s complaint about decisions to revoke his Russian citizenship and remove him from Russian territory. Mr Usmanov was granted Russian citizenship in 2008, but it was revoked ten years later when the authorities discovered that he had omitted […]
JUDGMENT Lăcătuş v. Switzerland 19.01.2021 (app. no. 14065/15) see here SUMMARY The case concerned an order for the applicant to pay a fine of 500 Swiss francs (CHF) (approximately 464 euros (EUR)) for begging in public in Geneva, and her detention in a remand prison for five days for failure to pay the fine. The […]
JUDGMENT Sağdıç v. Turkey 09.02.2021 (app. no. 9142/16) see here SUMMARY In this case the applicant alleged a breach of his right to protection of his reputation on account of a series of articles published in the daily newspapers Taraf and Yeni Şafak in November and December 2009, accusing him of involvement in an action […]
JUDGMENT Shmorgunov and Others v. Ukraine (applications no. 15367/14 and 13 others), Lutsenko and Verbytskyy v. Ukraine (12482/14 and 39800/14), Kadura and Smaliy v. Ukraine (42753/14 and 43860/14), Dubovtsev and Others v. Ukraine (21429/14 and 9 others) and Vorontsov and Others v. Ukraine (58925/14 and 4 others) 21.01.2021. see here SUMMARY The cases concerned events around […]
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 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
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.
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.
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”.
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.