Hudoc Judgment (Merits and just satisfaction) Violation of Art. 10; Pecuniary damage – financial award; Costs and expenses award – domestic proceedings; Costs and expenses award – Convention proceedings; Non-pecuniary damage – finding of violation sufficient
Citations:
34315/96, [2002] ECHR 159
Links:
Jurisdiction:
Human Rights
Cited by:
Cited – Adams and Others v Lord Advocate IHCS 31-Jul-2002
(Opinion) The applicants challenged the introduction of restrictions of hunting by foxes, arguing that the law would infringe their human rights.
Held: The Act was not infringing. Fox hunting as such was not a private activity protected by the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Human Rights
Updated: 26 November 2022; Ref: scu.167679
