swarb.co.uk - law index
These cases are from the lawindexpro database. They are now being transferred to the swarb.co.uk website in a better form. As a case is published there, an entry here will link to it. The swarb.co.uk site includes many later cases.
Human Rights - From: 1995 To: 1995
This page lists 133 cases, and was prepared on 28 July 2015.
Asselbourg -v- Luxembourg 29121/95
1995
ECHR
Human Rights
The applicants complained that the grant of licences for a steelworks would result in pollution, release of toxic gases and noise, and that the grant of the licences would infringe their article 8 rights. The court rejected the application "From the terms 'victim' and 'violation' in Article 34 of the Convention, like the underlying philosophy of the obligation to exhaust all domestic remedies imposed by Article 35, it can be deduced that, in the system for the protection of human rights as envisaged by the , framers of the Convention, exercise of the right of individual petition cannot have the aim of preventing a violation of the Convention. It is only in wholly exceptional circumstances that the risk of future violation may nevertheless confer the status of 'victim' on an individual applicant, and only then if he or she produces reasonable and convincing evidence of the probability of the occurrence of a violation concerning him or her personally: mere suspicions or conjectures are not enough in that respect."
1 Citers
Iribarne Perez -v- France (1995) 22 EHRR 153
1995
ECHR
Human Rights
The applicant complained that, having been convicted in Andorra, no provision availed for review of his detention in France where he served his sentence. Held: There was no violation "The review required by article 5(4) is incorporated in the decision depriving a person of his liberty when that decision is made by a court at the close of judicial proceeding; this is so, for example, where a sentence of imprisonment is pronounced after 'conviction by a competent court' within the meaning article 5(1)(a) of the Convention. Only the 'initial decision' is contemplated, not 'an ensuing period of detention in which new issues affecting the lawfulness of the detention might subsequently arise. However, article 5(4) sometimes requires the possibility of subsequent review of the lawfulness of detention by a court. This usually applies to the detention of persons of unsound mind within the meaning of paragraph 1(e), where the reasons initially warranting confinement may cease to exist: '...it would be contrary to the object and purpose of article 5 to interpret paragraph 4 thereof as making this category of confinement immune from subsequent review of lawfulness merely provided that the initial decision issued from a court'. The same principle applies to the detention 'after conviction by a competent court' mentioned in paragraph 1(a), but only in certain quite specific circumstances. These include, for example, the placing of a recidivist at the government's disposal in Belgium, the continuing detention of a person sentenced to an 'indeterminate' or 'discretionary' life sentence in Great Britain and the detention for security reasons of a person with an underdeveloped or permanently impaired mental capacity in Norway."
1 Citers
Askar -v- United Kingdom 26373/95
1995
ECHR
Human Rights
The Commission held inadmissible a complaint of substantial delay in granting permission for the family of a refugee to join him in this country, observing: "The Commission recalls that delay in proceedings concerning matters of "family life" may raise issues under Article 8 of the Convention. In the case of H. v. the United Kingdom, the Court found a violation of Article 8 in respect of proceedings concerning the mother's access to her child which lasted two years and seven months. However, the Court had regard in reaching that conclusion that the proceedings concerned a fundamental element of family life (whether a mother would be able to see her child again) and that they had a quality of irreversibility, lying within an area in which delay might lead to a de facto determination of the matter, whereas an effective respect for the mother's family life required that the question be determined solely in the light of all relevant considerations and not by mere effluxion of time."
European Convention on Human Rights 8
1 Citers
Gulec -v- Turkey (1995) 28 EHRR 121
1995
ECHR
Human Rights
A 15-year old boy was killed during the course of incidents in a Turkish city which involved demonstrations, shop closures and attacks on public buildings. The government maintained that he had been hit by a bullet fired by armed demonstrators at the local gendarmerie. An official investigation was quite soon discontinued. Held: The force used to disperse the demonstrators was not "absolutely necessary" (so that there was a violation of a substantive Article 2 right), and also that the ensuing investigation fell short of Turkey's procedural obligations, because it was not thorough; it was not conducted by independent authorities; it was not conducted with the participation of the complainants; the evidence of the gendarmes was accepted at its face value; and the ballistics tests which the situation required were not carried out.
European Convention on Human Rights 2
1 Citers
Re Arrows Ltd No 4; HL 1995 - [1995] 2 AC 75
NCF and AG -v- Italy [1995] 111 ILR 154
1995
Human Rights
The Commission held the application inadmissible on the ground, among others, that article 6 should be interpreted with due regard to parliamentary and diplomatic immunities as traditionally recognised. In the absence of any directly relevant authority to the contrary.
1 Citers
M M -v- France 20373/92; [1995] ECHR 65
9 Jan 1995
ECHR
Human Rights
European Convention on Human Rights
[ Bailii ]
KCM -v- Netherlands 21034/92; [1995] ECHR 108
9 Jan 1995
ECHR
Human Rights
European Convention on Human Rights
[ Bailii ]
Church Of Scientology Of Paris -v- France 19509/92; [1995] ECHR 107
9 Jan 1995
ECHR
Human Rights
European Convention on Human Rights
[ Bailii ]
Maria Alice Pires Neno -v- Portugal 23784/94; [1995] ECHR 58
10 Jan 1995
ECHR
Human Rights
European Convention on Human Rights
[ Bailii ]
Udo Walendy -v- Germany 21128/92; [1995] ECHR 86
11 Jan 1995
ECHR
Human Rights
European Convention on Human Rights
[ Bailii ]
Hellewell -v- Chief Constable of Derbyshire Gazette, 15 February 1995; Times, 13 January 1995; [1995] 1WLR 804; [1995] 4 All ER 473
13 Jan 1995
QBD
Laws J
Intellectual Property, Police, Media, Human Rights
The police were asked by shopkeepers concerned about shoplifting, for photographs of thieves so that the staff would recognise them. The police provided photographs including one of the claimant taken in custody. The traders were told only to show them to staff. Held: A duty of confidence could arise when the police photographed a suspect without his consent, but the photograph could be published if reasonably required for the prevention and detection of crime, the investigation of alleged offences, or the apprehension of suspects unlawfully at large. The police could rely on the public interest defence to any action for breach of confidence. The police in disclosing the photograph acted entirely in good faith for the prevention or detection of crime and had distributed it only to persons who had reasonable need to make use of it. However "the term reasonable is fluid in its application and it is as impossible as it is undesirable to lay down anything like a lexicon of the circumstances that will amount to reasonable use." (Obiter:) "If someone with a telephoto lens were to take from a distance and with no authority a picture of another engaged in some private act, his subsequent disclosure of the photograph would, in my judgment, as surely amount to a breach of confidence as if he had found or stolen a letter or diary in which the act was recounted and proceeded to publish it. In such a case, the law would protect what might reasonably be called a right of privacy, although the name accorded to the cause of action would be breach of confidence. It is, of course, elementary that, in all such cases, a defence based on the public interest would be available."
1 Cites
1 Citers
Bruno Gestra -v- Italy 21072/92; [1995] ECHR 62
16 Jan 1995
ECHR
Human Rights
European Convention on Human Rights
[ Bailii ]
Riccado Travers And 27 Others -v- Italy 15117/89; [1995] ECHR 67
16 Jan 1995
ECHR
Human Rights
European Convention on Human Rights
[ Bailii ]
Ralph Wilde, Hugo Greenhalgh And William Parry -v- United Kingdom 22382/93; [1995] ECHR 109
19 Jan 1995
ECHR
Human Rights
European Convention on Human Rights
[ Bailii ]
Schuler-Zgraggen -v- Switzerland (Article 50) 14518/89; [1995] ECHR 2
31 Jan 1995
ECHR
Human Rights
European Convention on Human Rights
[ Bailii ]
Friedl -v- Austria (1995) 21 EHRR 83; 15225/89; [1995] ECHR 12; [1995] ECHR 15225/89; [1995] ECHR 15974/90; (1996) 21 EHRR 1; (1995) 21 EHRR 83
31 Jan 1995
ECHR
Human Rights, Police
The Commission distinguished between the taking and keeping of photographs without identifying the subjects, and police questioning in order to establish identity and the recording of these personal data; the former was not an interference with article 8(1) but the latter was, although it was 'relatively slight' (Later friendly settlement).
1 Citers
[ Bailii ] - [ ECHR ] - [ Bailii ]
Benham -v- United Kingdom; ECHR 8-Feb-1995 - Times, 24 June 1996; Independent, 08 February 1995; 19380/92; [1996] ECHR 22; [1996] 22 EHRR 293
Vereniging Weekblad Bluf! -v- The Netherlands 16616/90; [1995] ECHR 3; [2007] ECHR 313; [1995] ECHR 3
9 Feb 1995
ECHR
Human Rights
Hudoc Judgment (Merits and just satisfaction) Violation of Art. 10; Costs and expenses award - domestic proceedings; Costs and expenses award - Convention proceedings
[ Bailii ] - [ ECHR ] - [ Bailii ] - [ Bailii ]
Allenet De Ribemont -v- France 15175/89
10 Feb 1995
ECHR
Human Rights
Hudoc Judgment (Merits and just satisfaction) Violation of Art. 6-2; Violation of Art. 6-1; Pecuniary damage - financial award; Non-pecuniary damage - financial award; Costs and expenses award - Convention proceedings; Lack of jurisdiction (injunction to State)
Gea CatalÁN -v- Spain [1995] ECHR 6; 19160/91; [1995] ECHR 6
10 Feb 1995
ECHR
Human Rights
Hudoc Preliminary objection rejected (implied withdrawal); No violation of Art. 6-3-a
[ Bailii ] - [ ECHR ] - [ Bailii ]
Welch -v- United Kingdom; ECHR 15-Feb-1995 - Times, 15 February 1995; Independent, 22 February 1995; 17440/90; (1995) 20 EHRR 247; [1995] ECHR 4; [1996] ECHR 12; [1995] ECHR 4
Vesa Peltonen -v- Finland 19583/92; [1995] ECHR 110
20 Feb 1995
ECHR
Human Rights
European Convention on Human Rights
[ Bailii ]
Sc -v- France 20944/92; [1995] ECHR 63
20 Feb 1995
ECHR
Human Rights
European Convention on Human Rights
[ Bailii ]
K Hermanus Joannes Van Den Dungen -v- Pays PAYS - 22838/93; [1995] ECHR 59
22 Feb 1995
ECHR
Human Rights
European Convention on Human Rights
[ Bailii ]
A B -v- Switzerland 20872/92; [1995] ECHR 64
22 Feb 1995
ECHR
Human Rights
European Convention on Human Rights
[ Bailii ]
Gasus Dosier-Und Fodertechnik Gmbh -v- The Netherlands; ECHR 23-Feb-1995 - [1995] ECHR 7; 15375/89; Series A no. 306-B, 66-74; (1995) 20 EHRR 403
Gasus Dosier UND FÖRDERTECHNIK GmbH v. THE NETHERLANDS - 15375/89; [1995] ECHR 7
23 Feb 1995
ECHR
Human Rights
European Convention on Human Rights
[ Bailii ]
Andre Loersch And Nouvelle Association Du Courrier -v- Switzerland 23868/94 and 23869/94; [1995] ECHR 68
24 Feb 1995
ECHR
Human Rights
European Convention on Human Rights
[ Bailii ]
Giuseppe Dello Preite -v- Italy 15488/89; [1995] ECHR 66
27 Feb 1995
ECHR
Human Rights
European Convention on Human Rights
[ Bailii ]
McMichael -v- United Kingdom; ECHR 2-Mar-1995 - Times, 02 March 1995; (1995) 20 EHRR 205; 16424/90; [1995] ECHR 8
Quinn -v- France [1995] ECHR 9; 18580/91; [1995] ECHR 9
22 Mar 1995
ECHR
Human Rights
Hudoc Judgment (Merits and just satisfaction) Violation of Art. 5-1; No violation of Art. 5-3 (detention on remand); Not necessary to examine Art. 18; Non-pecuniary damage - financial award; Costs and expenses award - domestic proceedings; Costs and expenses award - Convention proceedings
[ Bailii ] - [ ECHR ] - [ Bailii ]
Loizidou -v- Turkey 15318/89; (1995) 20 EHRR 99; [1995] ECHR 10
23 Mar 1995
ECHR
R Ryssdal P
Human Rights
(Preliminary objections) The ECHR considered the situation in northern Cyprus when it was asked as to Turkey's preliminary objections to admissibility: "although Article 1 sets limits on the reach of the Convention, the concept of 'jurisdiction' under this provision is not restricted to the national territory of the High Contracting Parties. According to its established case law, for example, the Court has held that the extradition or expulsion of a person by a Contracting State may give rise to an issue under Article 3, and hence engage the responsibility of that State under the Convention. In addition, the responsibility of Contracting Parties can be involved because of acts of their authorities, whether performed within or outside national boundaries, which produce effects outside their own territory."
the Court set out three different routes by which matters are capable of falling within the "jurisdiction" of a member state even though they occur outside its national territory: i) The extradition or expulsion of a person by a Contracting State may give rise to an issue under Article 3 and hence engage the responsibility of that state under the ECHR (see Soering v UK (1989) 11 EHRR 439, para 91); ii) The responsibility of Contracting Parties can be involved because of acts of their authorities, whether performed within or outside national bodies, which produce effects outside their own territory (Drozd and Janousek v France and Spain (1992) 14 EHRR 745, para 91);
iii) The responsibility of a Contracting Party may also arise when as a consequence of military action - whether lawful or unlawful - it exercises effective control of an area outside its national territory."
"Bearing in mind the object and purpose of the Convention, the responsibility of a Contracting Party may also arise when as a consequence of military action whether lawful or unlawful it exercises effective control of an area outside its national territory. The obligation to secure, in such an area, the rights and freedoms set out in the Convention derives from the fact of such control whether it be exercised directly, through its armed forces, or through a subordinate local administration."
1 Cites
1 Citers
[ Worldlii ] - [ Bailii ]
J and others -v- Switzerland 22398/93
5 Apr 1995
ECHR
Human Rights, Health
Even relatively minor medical treatment, if compulsory, may engage article 8.
European Convention on Human Rights 8
1 Citers
Patrick Martin -v- Switzerland 25099/94; [1995] ECHR 76
5 Apr 1995
ECHR
Human Rights
European Convention on Human Rights
[ Bailii ]
Younes El Maziani -v- France 25439/94; [1995] ECHR 75
5 Apr 1995
ECHR
Human Rights
European Convention on Human Rights
[ Bailii ]
Greek Federation Of Customs Officers -v- Greece 24581/94; [1995] ECHR 78
6 Apr 1995
ECHR
Human Rights
European Convention on Human Rights
[ Bailii ]
Nathalie Rappaport -v- France 24142/94; [1995] ECHR 79
6 Apr 1995
ECHR
Human Rights
European Convention on Human Rights
[ Bailii ]
Georges Henry -v- France 20714/92; [1995] ECHR 85
6 Apr 1995
ECHR
Human Rights
European Convention on Human Rights
[ Bailii ]
Milan Rai, Gill Allmond (Negotiate Now) -v- United Kingdom 25522/94; [1995] ECHR 111
6 Apr 1995
ECHR
Human Rights
European Convention on Human Rights
[ Bailii ]
Minister of State for Immigration & Ethnic Affairs -v- Ah Hin Teoh (1995) 128 ALR 353; [1995] HCA 20; (1995) 69 ALJR 423; (1995) 183 CLR 273
7 Apr 1995
Deane, Toohey, Gaudron, McHugh JJ
Commonwealth, Human Rights, International, Immigration
Austlii (High Court of Australia) International Law - Treaties - Convention ratified by Australia but not implemented by statute - Status in domestic law - Whether giving rise to legitimate expectations.
Immigration - Application for permanent entry - Applicant - Married man with children in Australia - Policy requirement that applicants be of good character - Applicant convicted and imprisoned before application dealt with - Application refused because of conviction - Convention requiring governmental actions concerning children to give primary consideration to best interests of child - Convention ratified by Australia but not incorporated by statute in Australian domestic law -Whether capable of giving rise to legitimate expectation that application would be dealt with in accordance with Convention - Convention on Rights of Child, Art 3 - Migration Act 1958 (Cth), ss 6(2), 6A(1), 16(1)(c).
1 Citers
[ Austlii ]
Guenat -v- Switzerland 24722/94; (1995) 810A DR 130
10 Apr 1995
ECHR
Human Rights, Police
Article 5 did not apply to a claim of false imprisonment by the police where they had acted through necessity.
European Convention on Human Rights 5
1 Citers
[ Bailii ]
Leon Guenat -v- Switzerland 24722/04; [1995] ECHR 77
10 Apr 1995
ECHR
Human Rights
European Convention on Human Rights
[ Bailii ]
Prager And Oberschlick -v- Austria 15974/90; (1996) 21 EHRR 1; [1995] ECHR 12; [1995] ECHR 12; [1995] ECHR 12_2
26 Apr 1995
ECHR
Human Rights, Media
Article 10 requires that journalists be permitted a good deal of latitude in how they present their material and that a degree of exaggeration must also be accepted. The media have a special place in any democratic society as purveyor of information and public watchdog. There is a strong public interest in maintaining the confidence of the public at large in the courts. Article 6 is intended, among other things, to promote confidence in the judicial process: "Regard must . . be had to the special role of the judiciary in society. As the guarantor of justice, a fundamental value in a law-governed State, it must enjoy public confidence if it is to be successful in carrying out its duties."
European Convention on Human Rights 10
1 Citers
[ Bailii ] - [ ECHR ] - [ Bailii ] - [ Bailii ]
Fischer -v- Austria [1995] ECHR 11; 16922/90; [1995] ECHR 11
26 Apr 1995
ECHR
Human Rights
Hudoc Judgment (Merits and just satisfaction) No violation of Art. 6-1 (right of access); Violation of Art. 6-1 (publicly); Pecuniary damage - claim rejected; Costs and expenses award - domestic proceedings; Costs and expenses award - Convention proceedings
[ Bailii ] - [ ECHR ] - [ Bailii ]
Piermont -v- France (1995) 20 EHRR 301; 15773/89; 15774/89; [1995] ECHR 14
27 Apr 1995
ECHR
Human Rights
Hudoc Judgment (Merits and just satisfaction) No violation of P4-2; Violation of Art. 10; Not necessary to examine Art. 14+10; Non-pecuniary damage - finding of violation sufficient; Costs and expenses award - domestic proceedings; Costs and expenses award - Convention proceedings
1 Citers
[ Bailii ]
Paccione -v- Italy [1995] ECHR 13; 16753/90; [1995] ECHR 13
27 Apr 1995
ECHR
Human Rights
Hudoc Judgment (Merits and just satisfaction) Violation of Art. 6-1; Just satisfaction rejected (out of time)
[ Bailii ] - [ ECHR ] - [ Bailii ]
Piermont -v- France 15773/89;15774/89; [1995] ECHR 14
27 Apr 1995
ECHR
Human Rights
ECHR Judgment (Merits and Just Satisfaction) - No violation of P4-2; Violation of Art. 10; Not necessary to examine Art. 14+10; Non-pecuniary damage - finding of violation sufficient; Costs and expenses award - domestic proceedings; Costs and expenses award - Convention proceedings.
[ ECHR ] - [ Bailii ]
Regina -v- Secretary of State for the Home Departmnent Ex Parte Adams Independent, 28 April 1995
28 Apr 1995
QBD
Human Rights
Court will not look behind Home Secretary's assertions with regard to the needs of national security
Prevention of Terrorism (Temporary Provisions) Act 1989
Air Canada -v- The United Kingdom 18465/91; (1995) 20 EHRR 150; [1995] ECHR 15
5 May 1995
ECHR
Human Rights
Hudoc No violation of P1-1; No violation of Art. 6-1
An aeroplane was seized as liable to forfeiture pursuant to section 141(1) of the 1979 Act. It was restored on payment of a penalty of 50,000. The company disputed that the aircraft was liable to forfeiture and proceedings were commenced under Schedule 3 of the Act but the aircraft was condemned as forfeit. The company argued that it had been subjected to a criminal penalty. By a bare majority, the Court concluded that the matters complained of did not involve the determination of a criminal charge. Section 141 provided a process in rem against any vehicle used in smuggling. No criminal charges had been brought and the criminal courts had not been involved in the matter. There was no threat of criminal proceedings in the event of non-compliance. The fact that property rights had been adversely affected could not of itself lead to the conclusion that a criminal charge had been brought. There had been no confiscation, though payment of a sum of money was required. In a dissenting judgment, Judge Walsh attached importance to the fact that the aircraft was still in transit and loaded with passengers and the company had no alternative to paying the sum demanded. It was abundantly clear that it was the intention of the authorities to impose a penalty of 50,000 and they succeeded in that. That penalty was levied in personam.
European Convention on Human Rights 6.1 - Customs and Excise Management Act 1979 141(1)
1 Citers
[ Bailii ] - [ ECHR ] - [ Bailii ]
Annie Mecili -v- France 23997/94; [1995] ECHR 80; [1995] ECHR 106
15 May 1995
ECHR
Human Rights
European Convention on Human Rights
[ Bailii ] - [ Bailii ]
Juan Gerardo Tora Tolmos -v- Spain 23816/94; [1995] ECHR 82
17 May 1995
ECHR
Human Rights
European Convention on Human Rights
[ Bailii ]
Isiltan -v- Turkey 20948/92; DR 81-B; [1995] ECHR 84
22 May 1995
ECHR
Human Rights
(Commission)
1 Citers
[ Bailii ]
Jones and Others -v- Attorney General of the Commonwealth of the Bahamas Gazette, 24 May 1995; [1995] 1 WLR 891
24 May 1995
PC
Human Rights, Commonwealth
The death penalty was properly imposed for murder since it was a requirement of the constitution.
1 Citers
Marlhens -v- France 22862/93; [1995] ECHR 16; [1995] ECHR 16
24 May 1995
ECHR
Human Rights
Hudoc Struck out of the list (friendly settlement)
[ Bailii ] - [ ECHR ] - [ Bailii ]
Jose Joaquim Aires -v- Portugal 21775/93; [1995] ECHR 83
25 May 1995
ECHR
Human Rights
European Convention on Human Rights
[ Bailii ]
Bradshaw -v- Attorney-General of Barbados and Others; Roberts -v- Attorney General of Barbados and Others Times, 01 June 1995; Gazette, 21 June 1995
1 Jun 1995
PC
Criminal Sentencing, Human Rights, Commonwealth
(Barbados) The maximum of 5 years to be spent awaiting the death penalty is appropriate and is not to be varied, even though it might be calculated broadly. It serves as a good general guideline.
Regina -v- Ministry of Defence Ex Parte Smith and Others Times, 13 June 1995; Independent, 08 June 1995
7 Jun 1995
QBD
Simon Brown LJ and Curtis J
Employment, Administrative, Human Rights, Discrimination, Armed Forces
An MOD ban on employing homosexuals was not Wednesbury unreasonable, even though it might be out of date. Pannick (counsel for the applicant, approved): The court may not interfere with the exercise of an administrative discretion on substantive grounds save where the court is satisfied that the decision is unreasonable in the sense that it is beyond the range of responses open to a reasonable decision-maker. But in judging whether the decision-maker has exceeded this margin of appreciation the human rights context is important. The more substantial the interference with human rights, the more the court will require by way of justification before it is satisfied that the decision is reasonable in the sense outlined above.' After referring to changes of attitude in society towards same-sex relationships: "I regard the progressive development and refinement of public and professional opinion at home and abroad, here very briefly described, as an important feature of this case. A belief which represented unquestioned orthodoxy in year X may have become questionable by year Y and unsustainable by year Z. Public and professional opinion are a continuum."
Sir Thomas Bingham MR: "It is, inevitably, common ground that the United Kingdom's obligation, [under article 8] binding in international law, to respect and secure compliance with this article is not one that is enforceable by domestic courts. The relevance of the Convention in the present context is as background to the complaint of irrationality. The fact that a decision-maker failed to take account of convention obligations when exercising an administrative discretion is not of itself a ground for impugning that exercise of discretion."
European Convention on Human Rights 8
1 Cites
1 Citers
Jamil -v- France [1995] ECHR 17; 15917/89; [1995] ECHR 17
8 Jun 1995
ECHR
Human Rights
Hudoc Judgment (Merits and just satisfaction) Violation of Art. 7-1; Non-pecuniary damage - finding of violation sufficient; Costs and expenses award - domestic proceedings; Costs and expenses award - Convention proceedings
[ Bailii ] - [ ECHR ] - [ Bailii ]
Kefalas And Others -v- Greece [1995] ECHR 18; 14726/89; [1995] ECHR 18
8 Jun 1995
ECHR
Human Rights
Hudoc Preliminary objection allowed (ratione temporis)
[ Bailii ] - [ ECHR ] - [ Bailii ]
Yagci And Sargin -v- Turkey 16419/90;16426/90; [1995] ECHR 20
8 Jun 1995
ECHR
Human Rights
ECHR Judgment (Merits and Just Satisfaction) - Preliminary objection rejected (ratione temporis); Preliminary objection rejected (non-exhaustion); Preliminary objection rejected (victim, estoppel); Violation of Art. 5-3; Violation of Art. 6-1; Non-pecuniary damage - financial award; Costs and expenses award - Convention proceedings; Lack of jurisdiction (injunction to State).
[ ECHR ] - [ Bailii ]
Mansur -v- Turkey [1995] ECHR 19; 16026/90; [1995] ECHR 19
8 Jun 1995
ECHR
Human Rights
Hudoc Judgment (Merits and just satisfaction) Preliminary objection rejected (ratione temporis); Preliminary objection rejected (non-exhaustion, estoppel); Preliminary objection rejected (victim, estoppel); Violation of Art. 5-3; Violation of Art. 6-1; Pecuniary damage - claim rejected; Non-pecuniary damage - financial award; Costs and expenses award - Convention proceedings
[ Bailii ] - [ ECHR ] - [ Bailii ]
Yagci And Sargin -v- Turkey 16419/90; [1995] ECHR 20
8 Jun 1995
ECHR
Human Rights
European Convention on Human Rights
[ Bailii ]
Thomas Reckley -v- The Minister of Public Safety and Immigration and others (Petition for a stay of execution) Gazette, 19 July 1995; Independent, 23 June 1995; Times, 15 June 1995; [1995] UKPC 2; [1995] AC 491
13 Jun 1995
PC
Criminal Sentencing, Human Rights, Commonwealth
(The Bahamas) If a serious constitutional issue is fairly raised by an appeal as to the constitutionality of the death penalty, then the death penalty must be stayed.
1 Citers
[ Bailii ] - [ PC ] - [ PC ]
Yagei and Sargin -v- Turkey Ind Summary, 26 June 1995; 16426/90; 16419/90
26 Jun 1995
ECHR
Criminal Practice, Human Rights
There was breach of the convention because of length of time the Defendants had been held until their trial.
Hudoc Judgment (Merits and just satisfaction) Preliminary objection rejected (ratione temporis); Preliminary objection rejected (non-exhaustion); Preliminary objection rejected (victim, estoppel); Violation of Art. 5-3; Violation of Art. 6-1; Non-pecuniary damage - financial award; Costs and expenses award - Convention proceedings; Lack of jurisdiction (injunction to State)
European Convention on Human Rights 5.3, 6.1
Stoitchkov & Chindarov -v- Bulgary 24571/94 & 24572/94; [1995] ECHR 87
28 Jun 1995
ECHR
Human Rights
European Convention on Human Rights
[ Bailii ]
Huggett -v- United Kingdom 24744/94; [1995] ECHR 88
28 Jun 1995
ECHR
Human Rights
European Convention on Human Rights
[ Bailii ]
Peter Zihlmann -v- Switzerland 21861/93; [1995] ECHR 74
28 Jun 1995
ECHR
Human Rights
European Convention on Human Rights
[ Bailii ]
Christian Estrosi -v- France 24359/94; [1995] ECHR 69
30 Jun 1995
ECHR
Human Rights
European Convention on Human Rights
[ Bailii ]
Jack Lang -v- France 23943/94; [1995] ECHR 70
30 Jun 1995
ECHR
Human Rights
European Convention on Human Rights
[ Bailii ]
Hentrich -v- France (Article 50) 13616/88
3 Jul 1995
ECHR
Human Rights
Hudoc Judgment (Just satisfaction) Pecuniary damage - financial award; Costs and expenses award - Convention proceedings; Interest on amount awarded
Klerks -v- The Netherlands 25212/94; [1995] ECHR 92
4 Jul 1995
ECHR
Human Rights
European Convention on Human Rights
[ Bailii ]
Marie Claude MAHAUT v France - 23326/94; [1995] ECHR 72
6 Jul 1995
ECHR
Human Rights
European Convention on Human Rights
[ Bailii ]
Azzouza -v- Belglum 27276/95; [1995] ECHR 95
6 Jul 1995
ECHR
Human Rights
European Convention on Human Rights
[ Bailii ]
Van Der Tang -v- Spain [1995] ECHR 26; 19382/92; [1995] ECHR 26
13 Jul 1995
ECHR
Human Rights
Hudoc Preliminary objection rejected (ex delicto non oritur actio); No violation of Art. 5-3
[ Bailii ] - [ ECHR ] - [ Bailii ]
Morganti -v- France [1995] ECHR 23; 17831/91; [1995] ECHR 113; [1995] ECHR 23
13 Jul 1995
ECHR
Human Rights
Hudoc Judgment (Lack of jurisdiction) Lack of jurisdiction (out of time)
[ Bailii ] - [ ECHR ] - [ Bailii ] - [ Bailii ]
Nasri -v- France 19465/92; [1995] ECHR 24; [1995] ECHR 24
13 Jul 1995
ECHR
Human Rights
Hudoc Judgment (Merits and just satisfaction) Violation of Art. 8 (if deportation order executed); Not necessary to examine Art. 3; Lack of jurisdiction (injunction to State)
[ Bailii ] - [ ECHR ] - [ Bailii ]
Kampanis -v- Greece [1995] ECHR 22; 17977/91; [1995] ECHR 22
13 Jul 1995
ECHR
Human Rights
Hudoc Judgment (Merits and just satisfaction) Violation of Art. 5-4; Pecuniary damage - claim rejected; Non-pecuniary damage - finding of violation sufficient; Costs and expenses award - domestic proceedings; Costs and expenses award - Convention proceedings
[ Bailii ] - [ ECHR ] - [ Bailii ]
Tolstoy Miloslavsky -v- United Kingdom; ECHR 19-Jul-1995 - Times, 19 July 1995; Independent, 22 September 1995; (1995) 20 EHRR 442; 18139/91; [1995] ECHR 25
Kerojarvi -v- Finland [1995] ECHR 27; 17506/90
19 Jul 1995
ECHR
Human Rights
Hudoc Judgment (Merits and just satisfaction) Violation of Art. 6-1; Non-pecuniary damage - finding of violation sufficient; Costs and expenses partial award - Convention proceedings
1 Citers
[ Bailii ] - [ ECHR ] - [ Bailii ]
Regina -v- Secretary of State for the Home Department Ex Parte Flynn Times, 20 July 1995
20 Jul 1995
CA
Human Rights
EC treaty right of free movement does not create individually enforceable rights.
Consejo General De Colegios Oficiales De Economistas De Espana -v- Spain 26114/95 & 26455/95; [1995] ECHR 94
4 Sep 1995
ECHR
Human Rights
European Convention on Human Rights
[ Bailii ]
Raidl -v- Austria 25342/94; [1995] ECHR 93
4 Sep 1995
ECHR
Human Rights
European Convention on Human Rights
[ Bailii ]
Raidl v Austria (1995) 20 EHRR CD 114; [1995] ECHR 93
4 Sep 1995
ECHR
Human Rights, Extradition
The Commission considered the admissibility of a claim that extradition to Russia on suspicion of murder had infringed the applicant's Convention rights. After finding ill-founded a complaint based on article 3 the Commission went on to consider the applicant's complaint that extradition had interfered with her married life in Austria, thereby violating her article 8 rights. The Commission held: "the interference with the applicant's family life was proportionate to the legitimate aim pursued, given the seriousness of the crime, of which the applicant was suspected even before she contracted marriage in Austria."
European Convention on Human Rights 8
1 Citers
[ Bailii ]
Remer -v- Germany 25096/94; [1995] ECHR 90
6 Sep 1995
ECHR
Human Rights
European Convention on Human Rights
[ Bailii ]
Stephan Waldberg -v- Turkey 22909/93; [1995] ECHR 73
6 Sep 1995
ECHR
Human Rights
European Convention on Human Rights
[ Bailii ]
Advia / Advic -v- United Kingdom [1995] 20 EHRR CD125; 25525/94; [1995] ECHR 57
6 Sep 1995
ECHR
Human Rights
(Commission) In the ordinary course of events the fact that there are siblings in the same jurisdiction as an applicant does not establish a family life per se. There must be some genuine connection between siblings for family life to obtain, particularly where one is dealing with adults: ' in accordance with the Commission's case law the exclusion of a person from the country in which his close relatives reside may raise an issue under Article 8 of the Convention. However, in examining cases of this nature the Commission's first task is to consider whether a sufficient link exists between the relatives concerned to give rise to the protection of the Article of the Convention. Although this will depend on the circumstances of each particular case, the Commission has already considered that the protection of Article 8 did not cover links between adult brothers who had been living apart for a long period of time and who are not dependent on each other. Moreover, the relationship between a parent and adult child will not necessarily require the protection of Article 8 of the Convention without evidence of further elements of dependency involving more than the normal emotional ties.'
European Convention on Human Rights 88
1 Citers
[ Bailii ]
Erdogan -v- Turkey 25160/94; [1995] ECHR 91
7 Sep 1995
ECHR
Human Rights
European Convention on Human Rights
[ Bailii ]
Timke -v- Germany 27311/95; [1995] ECHR 96
11 Sep 1995
ECHR
Human Rights
European Convention on Human Rights
[ Bailii ]
Ramtn Manoutcheri -v- France 24082/94; [1995] ECHR 71
13 Sep 1995
ECHR
Human Rights
European Convention on Human Rights
[ Bailii ]
Lwanga & Sempungo -v- Sweden 27249/95; [1995] ECHR 104
14 Sep 1995
ECHR
Human Rights
European Convention on Human Rights
[ Bailii ]
Diennet -v- France (1995) 21 EHRR 554; 18160/91; [1995] ECHR 28; [1996] 21 EHRR 554; [1995] ECHR 28
26 Sep 1995
ECHR
Human Rights
Hudoc Judgment (Merits and just satisfaction) Violation of Art. 6-1 (publicly); No violation of Art. 6-1 (impartiality); Non-pecuniary damage - finding of violation sufficient; Costs and expenses partial award - domestic proceedings; Costs and expenses partial award - Convention proceedings
"The Court reiterates that the holding of court hearings in public constitutes a fundamental principle enshrined in Article 6. This public character protects litigants against the administration of justice in secret with no public scrutiny; it is also one of the means whereby confidence in the court can be maintained. By rendering the administration of justice transparent, publicity contributes to the achievement of the aim of Article 6(1), namely a fair trial, the guarantee of which is one of the fundamental principles of any democratic society."
European Convention on Human Rights 6
1 Citers
[ Bailii ] - [ ECHR ] - [ Bailii ]
G -v- France 15312/89; [1995] ECHR 30; [1995] ECHR 30
27 Sep 1995
ECHR
Human Rights
Hudoc Lack of jurisdiction (complaint inadmissible); No violation of Art. 7-1
[ Bailii ] - [ ECHR ] - [ Bailii ]
Scollo -v- Italy [1995] ECHR 34; 19133/91; [1995] ECHR 34
28 Sep 1995
ECHR
Human Rights
Hudoc Judgment (Merits and just satisfaction) Violation of P1-1; Violation of Art. 6-1; Pecuniary damage - financial award; Non-pecuniary damage - financial award; Costs and expenses award - Convention proceedings
[ Bailii ] - [ ECHR ] - [ Bailii ]
Spadea And Scalabrino -v- Italy; ECHR 28-Sep-1995 - [1995] ECHR 35; 12868/87; (1996) 21 EHRR 482
Masson And Van Zon -v- The Netherlands 15346/89;15379/89; [1995] ECHR 32
28 Sep 1995
ECHR
Human Rights
European Convention on Human Rights
[ Bailii ]
Masson And Van Zon -v- The Netherlands 15346/89; [1995] ECHR 32; 15379/89
28 Sep 1995
ECHR
Human Rights
ECHR Judgment (Merits) - Lack of jurisdiction (complaint inadmissible); No violation of Art. 6-1; Not necessary to examine Art. 13.
The court discussed whether article 6 requires a discretion to be given to a judge to make an award of costs in favour of a successful defendant: As to whether a 'dispute' over a 'right' existed so as to attract the applicability of Article 6 (1), the Court will first address the issue whether a 'right' to the compensation claimed could arguably be said to be recognised under national law. In view of the status of the Convention within the legal order of the Netherlands, the Court observes firstly that the Convention does not grant to a person 'charged with a criminal offence' but subsequently acquitted a right either to reimbursement of costs incurred in the course of criminal proceedings against him, however necessary these costs might have been, or to compensation for lawful restrictions on his liberty. Such a right can be derived neither from Article (2) nor from any other provision of the Convention or its Protocols. It follows that the question whether such a right can be said in any particular case to exist must be answered solely with reference to domestic law. In this connection, in deciding whether a 'right', civil or otherwise, could arguably be said to be recognised by Netherlands law, the Court must have regard to the wording of the relevant legal provisions and to the way in which these provisions are interpreted by the domestic courts."
European Convention on Human Rights 6(1)
1 Citers
[ Bailii ] - [ ECHR ]
Procola -v- Luxembourg 14570/89; (1995) 22 EHRR 193; [1995] ECHR 33
28 Sep 1995
ECHR
Human Rights
A dairy association complained of milk quota orders made with retrospective effect under domestic provisions. A regulation had been submitted in draft to the Conseil d'Etat, which had advised that a statute was necessary to give retrospective effect to the proposed new rules and had drafted a single clause bill which had been enacted as the statute. The association's challenge to the four orders, based on their retrospective effect among other things, came before the Judicial Committee of the Conseil d'Etat, four of whose five members had previously taken part in drawing up the Conseil d'Etat's opinion on the draft regulation and framing the bill. The association's challenge was dismissed, and it complained that the Judicial Committee was not an independent and impartial tribunal and that its rights under article 6 of the European Convention had been violated. A majority of the Commission held that there had been no violation of article 6, but a minority dissented, holding (page 203) that, having regard to the importance of appearances and the increased concern of the public that the fair administration of justice should be guaranteed, the association could legitimately fear that its case would not be heard by an independent and impartial tribunal. The Court unanimously upheld this dissent. In paragraphs 44-45 of its judgment it said: "The only issue to be determined is whether the Judicial Committee satisfied the impartiality requirement of Article 6 of the Convention, regard being had to the fact that four of its five members had to rule on the lawfulness of a regulation which they had previously scrutinised in their advisory capacity. The Court notes that four members of the Conseil d'Etat carried out both advisory and judicial functions in the same case. In the context of an institution such as Luxembourg's Conseil d'Etat the mere fact that certain persons successively performed these two types of function in respect of the same decisions is capable of casting doubt on the institution's structural impartiality. In the instant case, Procola had legitimate grounds for fearing that the members of the Judicial Committee had felt bound by the opinion previously given. That doubt in itself, however slight its justification, is sufficient to vitiate the impartiality of the tribunal in question, and this makes it unnecessary for the Court to look into the other aspects of the complaint."
1 Citers
[ Bailii ] - [ ECHR ] - [ Bailii ]
McCann and Others -v- The United Kingdom; ECHR 6-Oct-1995 - Times, 09 October 1995; Independent, 06 October 1995; 18984/91; (1996) 21 EHRR 97; A324 (1995); [1995] ECHR 31; [1995] ECHR 31
Regina -v- Secretary of State for the Home Department and Another, Ex Parte Norney and Others Times, 06 October 1995; Independent, 04 October 1995; [1995] 7 Admin LR 861
6 Oct 1995
QBD
Prisons, Human Rights
The non-referral of lifers to the Parole Board till the minimum tariff had expired was unreasonable. A decision of the Parole Board, which is chaired by a High Court judge, can be the subject of judicial review.
Criminal Justice Act 1991 - European Convention on Human Rights
1 Citers
ACREP -v- Portugal 23892/94; [1995] ECHR 102
16 Oct 1995
ECHR
Human Rights
European Convention on Human Rights
[ Bailii ]
JR -v- Germany 22651/93; [1995] ECHR 98
18 Oct 1995
ECHR
Human Rights
European Convention on Human Rights
[ Bailii ]
Tugar -v- Italy 22869/93; [1995] ECHR 100
18 Oct 1995
ECHR
Human Rights
European Convention on Human Rights
[ Bailii ]
Schmautzer -v- Austria [1995] ECHR 40; 15523/89; [1995] ECHR 40
23 Oct 1995
ECHR
Human Rights
Hudoc Judgment (Merits and just satisfaction) Violation of Art. 6-1 (access); Not necessary to examine Art. 6-1 (publicly); Pecuniary damage - finding of violation sufficient; Costs and expenses partial award - domestic proceedings; Costs and expenses partial award - Convention proceedings
[ Bailii ] - [ ECHR ] - [ Bailii ]
Umlauft -v- Austria [1995] ECHR 41; 15527/89; [1995] ECHR 41
23 Oct 1995
ECHR
Human Rights
Hudoc Judgment (Merits and just satisfaction) Violation of Art. 6-1 (access); Not necessary to examine Art. 6-1 (publicly); Pecuniary damage - finding of violation sufficient; Non-pecuniary damage - finding of violation sufficient; Costs and expenses partial award - domestic proceedings; Costs and expenses partial award - Convention proceedings
[ Bailii ] - [ ECHR ] - [ Bailii ]
Gradinger -v- Austria [1995] ECHR 36; 15963/90; [1995] ECHR 36
23 Oct 1995
ECHR
Human Rights
Hudoc Judgment (Merits and just satisfaction) Violation of Art. 6-1 (access); Not necessary to examine Art. 6-1 (publicly); Preliminary objection rejected (reservation); Preliminary objection rejected (ratione temporis); Violation of P7-4; Costs and expenses partial award - domestic proceedings; Costs and expenses partial award - Convention proceedings
[ Bailii ] - [ ECHR ] - [ Bailii ]
Palaoro -v- Austria [1995] ECHR 37; 16718/90; [1995] ECHR 37
23 Oct 1995
ECHR
Human Rights
Hudoc Judgment (Merits and just satisfaction) Violation of Art. 6-1 (access); Not necessary to examine Art. 6-1 (publicly); Damage - finding of violation sufficient; Costs and expenses partial award - domestic proceedings; Costs and expenses partial award - Convention proceedings
[ Bailii ] - [ ECHR ] - [ Bailii ]
Pfarrmeier -v- Austria [1995] ECHR 38; 16841/90; [1995] ECHR 38
23 Oct 1995
ECHR
Human Rights
Hudoc Judgment (Merits and just satisfaction) Violation of Art. 6-1 (access); Not necessary to examine Art. 6-1 (publicly); Damage - finding of violation sufficient; Costs and expenses partial award - domestic proceedings; Costs and expenses partial award - Convention proceedings
[ Bailii ] - [ ECHR ] - [ Bailii ]
Pramstaller -v- Austria [1995] ECHR 39; 16713/90; [1995] ECHR 39
23 Oct 1995
ECHR
Human Rights
Hudoc Judgment (Merits and just satisfaction) Violation of Art. 6-1 (access); Not necessary to examine Art. 6-1 (publicly); Damage - finding of violation sufficient; Costs and expenses partial award - domestic proceedings; Costs and expenses partial award - Convention proceedings
[ Bailii ] - [ ECHR ] - [ Bailii ]
Iribarne PÉRez -v- France [1995] ECHR 43; 16462/90; [1995] ECHR 43
24 Oct 1995
ECHR
Human Rights
[ Bailii ] - [ ECHR ] - [ Bailii ]
Agrotexim and Others -v- Greece 14807/89; (1996) EHRR 250; [1995] ECHR 42
24 Oct 1995
ECHR
Human Rights, Company
Hudoc Not necessary to examine preliminary objection (ratione temporis); Preliminary objection allowed (victim); Lack of jurisdiction (complaint inadmissible, new complaint)
The applicant companies held shares in a company owning development land. The local Council took steps to expropriate the land. The shareholders complained that the company's rights had been violated and that, in turn, that had adversely affected their rights because of the resulting fall in the value of their shares. The complaint was based on the proposition that the alleged violation of the Brewery's rights to peaceful enjoyment of its possessions had affected their own financial interests because of the resulting fall in the value of their shares. Held: A lifting of the corporate veil so as to disregard the fact that the person directly affected the Brewery was a separate legal personality and was (if anyone was) the victim, would be justified only in exceptional circumstances such as where it itself could not have raised the complaint.
European Convention on Human Rights
1 Citers
[ Bailii ] - [ Bailii ]
Regina -v- Secretary of State for the Home Department Ex Parte O'Dhuibhir and Another Times, 26 October 1995; Independent, 24 October 1995
24 Oct 1995
QBD
Human Rights, Prisons
It is lawful for a prison to deny any physical contact between a prisoner categorised as high risk, and any visitors.
EM -v- Norway 20087/92; [1995] ECHR 97
26 Oct 1995
ECHR
Human Rights
European Convention on Human Rights
[ Bailii ]
Baegen -v- The Netherlands [1995] ECHR 44; 16696/90; [1995] ECHR 44
27 Oct 1995
ECHR
Human Rights
[ Bailii ] - [ ECHR ] - [ Bailii ]
Papamichalopoulos And Others -v- Greece; ECHR 31-Oct-1995 - 14556/89
Vogt -v- Germany; ECHR 1-Nov-1995 - Times, 01 November 1995; 17851/91; [1995] 21 EHRR 205; [1995] ECHR 29; [1996] ECHR 34; [1996] ECHR 34; [1995] ECHR 29; [1996] ECHR 106; [1997] ECHR 206; [1993] ECHR 65
Regina -v- Ministry of Defence ex parte Smith; ex parte Grady [1995] EWCA Civ 22; [1996] 2 WLR 305; [1996] QB 517; [1996] IRLR 100; [1996] ICR 740; [1996] 1 All ER 257
3 Nov 1995
CA
Sir Thomas Bingham MR, Henry LJ, Thorpe LJ
Employment, Armed Forces, Administrative, Human Rights
Four appellants challenged the policy of the ministry to discharge homosexuals from the armed servces.
Sir Thomas Bingham MR said: "The court may not interfere with the exercise of an administrative discretion on substantive grounds save where the court is satisfied that the decision is unreasonable in the sense that it is beyond the range of responses open to a reasonable decision-maker. But in judging whether the decision-maker has exceeded this margin of appreciation the human rights context is important. The more substantial the interference with human rights, the more the court will require by way of justification before it is satisfied that the decision is reasonable in the sense outlined above."
1 Cites
1 Citers
[ Bailii ]
Lincoln Anthony Guerra -v- Cipriani Baptiste and others (No 2) Times, 08 November 1995; Independent, 15 November 1995; [1995] UKPC 3; Appeal No 11 of 1995; [1996] 1 A C 397
6 Nov 1995
PC
Human Rights, Criminal Sentencing, Constitutional, Commonwealth
(Trinidad and Tobago) The execution of a prisoner after a substantial delay of 5 years was a breach of his constitutional rights, constituting cruel and unusual punishment.
1 Cites
1 Citers
[ Bailii ] - [ PC ]
British-American Tobacco Company Ltd -v- The Netherlands 19589/92; [1995] ECHR 46
20 Nov 1995
ECHR
Human Rights
European Convention on Human Rights
[ Bailii ]
British-American Tobacco Company Ltd -v- The Netherlands Times, 11 December 1995; 19589/92; [1995] ECHR 46
20 Nov 1995
ECHR
Intellectual Property, Human Rights
The Netherlands patent appeal procedure was valid and not a denial of human rights.
Hudoc No violation of Art. 6-1; Not necessary to examine Art. 13; No separate issue under P1-1
[ Bailii ] - [ ECHR ]
Pressos Compania Naviera S A And Others -v- Belgium; ECHR 20-Nov-1995 - [1995] ECHR 471; 17849/91; [1995] 21 EHHR 301; (1996) 21 EHRR 301
Barreto -v- Portugal; ECHR 21-Nov-1995 - [1995] ECHR 49; 18072/91
Acquaviva -v- France [1995] ECHR 48; 19248/91; [1995] ECHR 48
21 Nov 1995
ECHR
Human Rights
[ Bailii ] - [ ECHR ] - [ Bailii ]
SW -v- The United Kingdom; CR -v- United Kingdom; ECHR 22-Nov-1995 - Times, 05 December 1995; [1995] 21 EHRR 363; 20166/92; [1995] ECHR 52; [1995] ECHR 52
CR -v- The United Kingdom [1995] ECHR 51; 20190/92; [1995] ECHR 51
22 Nov 1995
ECHR
Human Rights
[ Bailii ] - [ ECHR ] - [ Bailii ]
Bryan -v- The United Kingdom; ECHR 22-Nov-1995 - Times, 08 December 1995; 19178/91; 44/1994/491/573; [1995] ECHR 50; [1996] 28 EG 137; [1996] 2 EGLR 123; [1996] 1 PLR 47; (1996) 21 EHRR 342
Meng -v- Portugal 25862/94; [1995] ECHR 103
27 Nov 1995
ECHR
Human Rights
European Convention on Human Rights
[ Bailii ]
Ribitsch -v- Austria [1995] ECHR 55; 18896/91; [1995] ECHR 55
4 Dec 1995
ECHR
Human Rights
Hudoc Judgment (Merits and just satisfaction) Violation of Art. 3; Non-pecuniary damage - financial award; Costs and expenses partial award - domestic proceedings; Costs and expenses partial award - Convention proceedings
[ Bailii ] - [ ECHR ] - [ Bailii ]
Terranova -v- Italy [1995] ECHR 56; 17156/90; [1995] ECHR 56
4 Dec 1995
ECHR
Human Rights
Hudoc Judgment (Merits and just satisfaction) Violation of Art. 6-1; Non-pecuniary damage - financial award; Costs and expenses partial award - Convention proceedings
[ Bailii ] - [ ECHR ] - [ Bailii ]
Ciricosta And Viola -v- Italy [1995] ECHR 54; 19753/92; [1995] ECHR 54
4 Dec 1995
ECHR
Human Rights
[ Bailii ] - [ ECHR ] - [ Bailii ]
Tauira & 18 Others -v- France 28204/95; [1995] ECHR 105
4 Dec 1995
ECHR
Human Rights
European Convention on Human Rights
[ Bailii ]
Bellet -v- France [1995] ECHR 53; 23805/94; [1995] ECHR 53
4 Dec 1995
ECHR
Human Rights
Hudoc Judgment (Merits and just satisfaction) Violation of Art. 6-1; Damage - financial award; Costs and expenses partial award - domestic proceedings; Costs and expenses partial award - Convention proceedings
[ Bailii ] - [ ECHR ] - [ Bailii ]
Union Royale Belge des societes de Football Association and others -v- Bosman and others; ECJ 15-Dec-1995 - C-415/93; [1995] EUECJ C-415/93; [1995] ECR I-4921
