Ill-treatment by police officers during criminal proceedings against the applicant and ineffective ensuing investigation (violation of 3 in Samartsev v. RU)
Poor conditions of detention (violation of 3
in Ion Ciobanu v. RO)
Arbitrary detention of Ukraine’s former Prime
Minister, lack of proper
review of the lawfulness of the measure, lack of possibility to seek
compensation and restrictions on the use of her rights applied for other purposes
than the ones set out, on account of the detention having mainly served as punishment
for her contemptuous behaviour in court (violation of 5 §§ 1, 4 and 5 and of 18
in Tymoshenko v. UKR; no violation of 3 concerning ill treatment allegations
due to the applicant’s hindrance in the ensuing investigation at national level)
Detention pending
expulsion – unlawfulness of the measure against a minor (violation of 5 § 1 in
Barjamaj v. GR) and conditions of detention in the custody of the immigration
authorities (violation of 3 in Chkhartishvili v. GR)
Forced placement in a
psychiatric hospital following a recommendation of a psychiatrist on duty at the
time the applicant was visiting her daughter at the premises and impossibility
to attend the proceedings for reviewing the measure due to lack of notification
(violation of 5 § 1 in Zagidulina v. RU)
Unlawful detention in
police custody prior to the transfer to a hospital for involuntary psychiatric
examination (violation of 5 § 1 in Petukhova v. RU)
Deprived access to
court due to lengthy review of an application for a patent before the relevant
national authority and its subsequent dismissal close to the end of the 20
years’ limit for patent protection (violation of 6 § 1 in Kristiansen and Tyvik
As v. NOR)
Non-payment of family
allowances to which the applicants were entitled – not in breach of their
property rights due to lack of exercise in a timely manner of their right to
claim them (no violation of 1 Prot. 1 in Panteliou-Darne and Blandzouka v. GR)
Revision of a judgment
of the Court following a sales contract to a third party and compulsory
liquidation of the applicant company having occurred previously to the Court’s
judgment of 2009 by which it found a violation and reserved the question of
just satisfaction (request for revision accepted and case declared inadmissible
– Gardean and S.C. Grup 95 S.A. v. RO)
Repetitive cases – lengthy
non-enforcement of final domestic judgments (RU), quashing of a final binding
judgment (RU), length of proceedings (CRO, GR, RU, UKR)
The Court’s related press releases:
- in Ukraininan http://hudoc.echr.coe.int/sites/fra-press/pages/search.aspx?i=003-4343142-5208280
- in Russian http://hudoc.echr.coe.int/sites/fra-press/pages/search.aspx?i=003-4345333-5211343
Panteliou-Darne and
Blandzouka v. GR http://hudoc.echr.coe.int/sites/fra-press/pages/search.aspx?i=003-4345127-5211017
Judgments 30 April http://hudoc.echr.coe.int/sites/fra-press/pages/search.aspx?i=003-4342975-5208035
No comments:
Post a Comment