Tag: Human Rights

Mehmet Kaya v Turkey: ECHR 6 Dec 2005

ECHR Judgment (Merits and Just Satisfaction) – Violation of Art. 6-1; Pecuniary damage – claim dismissed; Non-pecuniary damage – financial award; Costs and expenses partial award – domestic proceedings; Costs and expenses partial award – Convention proceedings.

Citations:

36150/02, [2005] ECHR 816

Links:

Worldlii, Bailii

Jurisdiction:

Human Rights

Human Rights

Updated: 04 July 2022; Ref: scu.236804

Kosarevskaya v Ukraine: ECHR 6 Dec 2005

ECHR Judgment (Merits and Just Satisfaction) – Violation of Art. 6-1; Violation of P1-1; Violation of Art. 13; Non-pecuniary damage – financial award; Costs and expenses partial award – Convention proceedings.

Citations:

29459/03 ; 4935/04 ; 26996/04, [2005] ECHR 814

Links:

Worldlii, Bailii

Jurisdiction:

Human Rights

Human Rights

Updated: 04 July 2022; Ref: scu.236812

Mikulova v Slovakia: ECHR 6 Dec 2005

ECHR Judgment (Merits and Just Satisfaction) – Violation of Art. 6-1 (access to court); Remainder inadmissible; Pecuniary damage – claim dismissed; Non-pecuniary damage – financial award; Costs and expenses partial award – domestic proceedings; Costs and expenses partial award – Convention proceedings.

Citations:

64001/00, [2005] ECHR 817

Links:

Worldlii, Bailii

Jurisdiction:

Human Rights

Human Rights

Updated: 04 July 2022; Ref: scu.236799

Majercsik v Hungary: ECHR 20 Dec 2005

ECHR Judgment (Merits and Just Satisfaction) – Violation of Art. 6-1; Remainder inadmissible; Pecuniary damage – claim dismissed; Non-pecuniary damage – financial award; Costs and expenses partial award – domestic proceedings; Costs and expenses partial award – Convention proceedings.

Citations:

13323/02, [2005] ECHR 889

Links:

Worldlii, Bailii

Jurisdiction:

Human Rights

Human Rights

Updated: 04 July 2022; Ref: scu.236773

Ozer And Others v Turkey: ECHR 20 Dec 2005

ECHR Judgment (Merits and Just Satisfaction) – Violation of P1-1; Pecuniary damage – financial award; Non-pecuniary damage – finding of violation sufficient; Costs and expenses (domestic proceedings) – claim dismissed; Costs and expenses partial award – Convention proceedings.

Citations:

42708/98, [2005] ECHR 893

Links:

Worldlii, Bailii

Jurisdiction:

Human Rights

Human Rights

Updated: 04 July 2022; Ref: scu.236776

Regina v Xhabri: CACD 7 Dec 2005

The complainant alleged that the defendant had forced her into prostitution under duress. Hearsay evidence had been admitted from members of the complainant’s family as to what she had told them. They were not available to give evidence at the trial.
Held: The defendant had no objected to evidence from the complainant as to the same matters. The admission of evidence from a witness who was unavailable to give evidence and be cross examined was not a breach of the defendant’s right to a fair trial.

Judges:

Mrs Justice Rafferty, Lord Phillips Lord Chief Justice of England and Wales Mr Justice Mackay

Citations:

Times 10-Jan-2006, [2005] EWCA Crim 3135

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Criminal Justice Act 2003 8118, European Convention on Human Rights 6

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Evidence, Human Rights

Updated: 04 July 2022; Ref: scu.235951

Fedotov v Russia: ECHR 25 Oct 2005

ECHR Judgment (Merits and Just Satisfaction) – No violation of Art. 3 (one period of detention); Violation of Art. 3 (other period of detention); Violation of Art. 5-1; Not necessary to examine under Arts. 5-2, 5-3 and 5-4; Violation of Art. 5-5; Violation of Art. 6-1; Violation of P1-1; Pecuniary damage – State to secure enforcement of domestic judgments; Non-pecuniary damage – financial award; Costs and expenses (Convention proceedings) – claim dismissed; Costs and expenses partial award – domestic proceedings.

Citations:

5140/02, [2005] ECHR 925

Links:

Bailii

Human Rights

Updated: 04 July 2022; Ref: scu.231545

Mykhaylenky And Others v Ukraine: ECHR 30 Nov 2004

ECHR Judgment (Merits and Just Satisfaction) – Preliminary objections dismissed (non-exhaustion of domestic remedies, ratione personae);Violation of Art. 6-1; Violation of P1-1; Pecuniary damage – financial award;Non-pecuniary damage – financial award; Costs and expenses partial award – Convention proceedings.

Citations:

35201/02, [2004] ECHR 656, 35196/02, 35091/02

Links:

Worldlii, Bailii

Statutes:

European Convention on Human Rights

Jurisdiction:

Human Rights

Human Rights

Updated: 04 July 2022; Ref: scu.230649

Rey And Others v France: ECHR 5 Oct 2004

ECHR Judgment (Merits and Just Satisfaction) – Violation of Art. 6-1; Non-pecuniary damage – financial award; Costs and expenses (domestic proceedings) – claim rejected; Costs and expenses (Convention proceedings) – claim rejected.

Citations:

68406/01;68412/01;68408/01;…, [2004] ECHR 486

Links:

Worldlii, Bailii

Statutes:

European Convention on Human Rights

Jurisdiction:

Human Rights

Human Rights

Updated: 04 July 2022; Ref: scu.230583

Copsey v WWB Devon Clays Ltd: CA 25 Jul 2005

The claimant said that his employer had failed to respect his right to express his beliefs by obliging him, though a Christian, to work on Sundays.
Held: The appeal failed. ‘The Commission’s position on Article 9, as I understand it, is that, so far as working hours are concerned, an employer is entitled to keep the workplace secular. In such cases an employee is not in general entitled to complain that there has been a material interference with his Article 9 rights.’ A reasonable employer, acting fairly was entitled to change his work practices.

Judges:

Mummery, Rix, Neuberger LJJ

Citations:

[2005] EWCA Civ 932, Times 25-Aug-2005, [2005] 1CR 1789, [2005] IRLR 811

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

European Convention on Human Rights 9

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Abernethy v Mott Hay and Anderson CA 1974
Lord Cairns said: ‘A reason for the dismissal of an employee is a set of facts known to the employer, or it may be of beliefs held by him, which cause him to dismiss the employee. If at the time of his dismissal the employer gives a reason for it, . .
Cited – Kokkinakis v Greece ECHR 25-May-1993
The defendant was convicted for proselytism contrary to Greek law. He claimed a breach of Article 9.
Held: To say that Jehovah’s Witness were proselytising criminally was excessive. Punishment for proselytising was unlawful in the . .
Cited – Regina v Secretary of State for Education and Employment and others ex parte Williamson and others HL 24-Feb-2005
The appellants were teachers in Christian schools who said that the blanket ban on corporal punishment interfered with their religious freedom. They saw moderate physical discipline as an essential part of educating children in a Christian manner. . .
Cited – Bell v The Chief Constable of Greater Manchester Police CA 19-Jul-2005
The claimant had sued over the way he was treated by the respondent in a fraud investigation. The court had dismissed his claims for wrongful arrest and false imprisonment. A prosecution had been commenced but dropped. The judge had held the arrest . .
Cited – Stedman v United Kingdom ECHR 9-Apr-1997
(Commission) The applicant alleged that her dismissal for refusal to work on Sundays constituted a violation of her freedom to manifest her religion in worship, practice and observance, contrary to Article 9.
Held: The Commission first had to . .
Cited – Ahmad v United Kingdom ECHR 1981
(Commision) The applicant was a devout Muslim. His religious duty was to offer prayers on Fridays and to attend a mosque if possible. He was employed as a full time primary school teacher. He complained that he was forced to resign because he was . .
Cited – Konttinen v Finland ECHR 3-Dec-1996
(Commission) The applicant was a civil servant and a Seventh-day Adventist. He was dismissed for his refusal to continue working after sunset on Fridays. His contract required him to work on Friday evenings after sunset.
Held: The claim was . .
Cited – Ahmad v Inner London Education Authority EAT 1976
The appellant was a moslem junior school teacher. The Authority appealed an acceptance of his claim for unfair dismissal, having left his employment because he was not given time off to attend the mosque on Fridays. The Tribunal considered whether, . .
Cited – Ahmad v Inner London Education Authority CA 1977
The appellant said that his human rights were infringed when, as a moslem, he was refsued time off from his work as a primary school teacher to attend prayers at the mosque on Fridays. He had subsequentlly been re-instated part-time, but complained . .
Cited – SB, Regina (on the Application of) v Denbigh High School CA 2-Mar-2005
The applicant, a Muslim girl sought to be allowed to wear the gilbab to school. The school policy which had been approved by Muslim clerics prohibited this, saying the shalwar kameeze and headscarf were sufficient. The school said she was making a . .
Cited – Kalac v Turkey ECHR 1-Jul-1997
In exercising his freedom to manifest his beliefs an individual ‘may need to take his specific situation into account.’ ‘The Commission recalls that the expression ‘in accordance with the law’, within the meaning of Article 9(2), requires first that . .
Cited – X v Y (Employment: Sex Offender) CA 28-May-2004
The claimant had been dismissed after it was discovered he had been cautioned for a public homosexual act. He appealed dismissal of his claim saying that the standard of fairness applied was inappropriate with regard to the Human Rights Act, and . .
Cited – Smith and Grady v The United Kingdom ECHR 27-Sep-1999
The United Kingdom’s ban on homosexuals within the armed forces was a breach of the applicants’ right to respect for their private and family life. Applicants had also been denied an effective remedy under the Convention. The investigations into . .
Appeal from – Copsey v WWB Devon Clays Ltd EAT 26-Nov-2003
EAT Disability Discrimination – Disability . .

Cited by:

Cited – Begum (otherwise SB), Regina (on the Application of) v Denbigh High School HL 22-Mar-2006
The student, a Muslim wished to wear a full Islamic dress, the jilbab, but this was not consistent with the school’s uniform policy. She complained that this interfered with her right to express her religion.
Held: The school’s appeal . .
Cited – McFarlane v Relate Avon Ltd CA 29-Apr-2010
The employee renewed his application for leave to appeal against refusal of his discrimination claim on the grounds of religious belief. He worked as a relationship sex therapist, and had signed up to the employer’s equal opportunities policy, but . .
Cited – Johns and Another, Regina (on The Application of) v Derby City Council and Another Admn 28-Feb-2011
The claimants had acted as foster carers for several years, but challenged a potential decision to discontinue that when, as committed Christians, they refused to sign to agree to treat without differentiation any child brought to them who might be . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Employment, Human Rights

Updated: 01 July 2022; Ref: scu.228994

Moldovan And Others v Romania (No. 1): ECHR 12 Jul 2005

In 1993 a pogrom had taken place in a Roma village, resulting in a number of deaths and widespread destruction of property. The State, in the form of the local police, was alleged to have been implicated. Romania acceded to the Convention on 20 June 1994. Investigations into the pogrom, and proceedings arising out of it commenced in 1993 but continued up to 2000. The applicants sought to invoke the procedural obligation under article 2, and a parallel obligation arising under article 3, alleging various deficiencies in the investigations.
Held: The complaint was rejected. The Convention only applied with respect to Romania after the date of its accession; it did not apply to Romania at the time of the pogrom. Because the procedural obligation to conduct an effective investigation was ‘derived from’ the killings and the destruction of property, whose compatibility with the Convention could not be examined by the Court, it followed that the complaint of breach of the procedural obligations was also incompatible ratione temporis with the provisions of the Convention.

Citations:

64320/01, [2005] ECHR 473, 41138/98

Links:

Worldlii, Bailii

Citing:

Cited – East African Asians v United Kingdom ECHR 1973
(Commission) A group of Asian men, United Kingdom citizens, complained that, among other things, their Article 8 rights to respect for family life were infringed when they were refused permission to enter the United Kingdom to join their wives. The . .

Cited by:

Cited – Adam, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department; Limbuela v Same; Tesema v Same HL 3-Nov-2005
The applicants had each entered the UK with a view to seeking asylum, but having failed to seek asylum immediately, they had been refused any assistance, were not allowed to work and so had been left destitute. Each had claimed asylum on the day . .
Cited – McCaughey and Another, Re Application forJudicial Review SC 18-May-2011
The claimants sought a fuller inquest into deaths at the hands of the British Army in 1990 in Northern Ireland. On opening the inquest, the coroner had declined to undertake to hold a hearing compliant with article 2, and it had not made progress. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Human Rights

Updated: 01 July 2022; Ref: scu.228732

Dansk Rorindustri v Commission C-213/02: ECFI 28 Jun 2005

(Competition)

Citations:

[2005] EUECJ C-213/02

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

European

Citing:

See Also – Dansk Rorindustri v Commission C-206/02 ECJ 28-Jun-2005
(Competition) . .
See Also – Dansk Rorindustri v Commission C-189/02 ECJ 28-Jun-2005
(Competition) . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Commercial, Human Rights

Updated: 01 July 2022; Ref: scu.227968

Dansk Rorindustri v Commission C-206/02: ECJ 28 Jun 2005

(Competition)

Citations:

[2005] EUECJ C-206/02

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

European

Cited by:

See Also – Dansk Rorindustri v Commission C-207/02 ECJ 28-Jun-2005
(Competition) . .
See Also – Dansk Rorindustri v Commission C-213/02 ECFI 28-Jun-2005
(Competition) . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Commercial, Human Rights

Updated: 01 July 2022; Ref: scu.227965

Caille v France: ECHR 5 Oct 2004

ECHR Judgment (Merits and Just Satisfaction) – Violation of Art. 6-1 with regard to the length of the proceedings; Inadmissible under Art. 6-1 with regard to the fairness of the proceedings; Non-pecuniary damage – financial award; Costs and expenses (domestic proceedings) – claim rejected; Costs and expenses partial award – Convention proceedings.

Citations:

3455/02, [2004] ECHR 467

Links:

Worldlii, Bailii

Jurisdiction:

Human Rights

Human Rights

Updated: 01 July 2022; Ref: scu.227878

Dansk Rorindustri v Commission C-207/02: ECJ 28 Jun 2005

(Competition)

Citations:

C-207/02, [2005] EUECJ C-207/02

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

European

Citing:

See Also – Dansk Rorindustri v Commission C-206/02 ECJ 28-Jun-2005
(Competition) . .

Cited by:

See also – Dansk Rorindustri v Commission (Competition) ECJ 28-Jun-2005
. .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Commercial, Human Rights

Updated: 01 July 2022; Ref: scu.227966

Kuibishev v Bulgaria: ECHR 30 Sep 2004

ECHR Judgment (Merits and Just Satisfaction) – Violation of Art. 5-3 with regard to right to be brought promptly before a judge; Violation of Art. 5-3 with regard to length of pre-trial detention; Violation of Art. 5-4; No violation of Art. 6-1; Non-pecuniary damage – financial award; Costs and expenses partial award – Convention proceedings.

Citations:

39271/98, [2004] ECHR 459, [2009] ECHR 1688

Links:

Worldlii, Bailii, Bailii

Human Rights

Updated: 01 July 2022; Ref: scu.227817

Sahindogan v Turkey: ECHR 30 Nov 2004

ECHR Judgment (Merits and Just Satisfaction) – Violation of Art. 6-1; Not necessary to examine Art. 6-3-c; Pecuniary damage – claim rejected; Non-pecuniary damage – finding of violation sufficient; Costs and expenses partial award – Convention proceedings.

Citations:

54545/00, [2004] ECHR 659

Links:

Worldlii, Bailii

Jurisdiction:

Human Rights

Human Rights

Updated: 01 July 2022; Ref: scu.227807

Vrana v The Czech Republic: ECHR 30 Nov 2004

ECHR Judgment (Merits and Just Satisfaction) – Violation of Art. 6-1; Non-pecuniary damage – financial award; Costs and expenses (domestic proceedings) – claim dismissed; Costs and expenses award – Convention proceedings.

Citations:

70846/01, [2004] ECHR 661, [2004] ECHR 661

Links:

Worldlii, Bailii

Jurisdiction:

Human Rights

Human Rights

Updated: 01 July 2022; Ref: scu.227809

Vaney v France: ECHR 30 Nov 2004

ECHR Judgment (Merits and Just Satisfaction) – Violation of Art. 6-1 concerning criminal proceedings; Violation of Art. 6-1 concerning civil proceedings; Non-pecuniary damage – financial award; Costs and expenses award – Convention proceedings.

Citations:

53946/00, [2004] ECHR 660, [2004] ECHR 660, [2010] ECHR 1879

Links:

Worldlii, Bailii, Bailii

Jurisdiction:

Human Rights

Human Rights

Updated: 01 July 2022; Ref: scu.227808

Onnikian v France: ECHR 5 Oct 2004

ECHR Judgment (Merits and Just Satisfaction) – Violation of Art. 6-1; Pecuniary damage – claim rejected; Non-pecuniary damage – financial award; Costs and expenses (domestic proceedings) – claim rejected; Costs and expenses (Convention proceedings) – claim rejected.

Citations:

15816/02, [2004] ECHR 482

Links:

Worldlii, Bailii

Jurisdiction:

Human Rights

Human Rights

Updated: 01 July 2022; Ref: scu.227877

Kos v The Czech Republic: ECHR 30 Nov 2004

ECHR Judgment (Merits and Just Satisfaction) – Violation of Art. 6-1 concerning the length of proceedings; Inadmissible under Art. 6-1 concerning the length of the other set of proceedings; Pecuniary damage – claim rejected; Non-pecuniary damage – financial award; Costs and expenses award – Convention proceedings.

Citations:

75546/01, [2004] ECHR 655, [2004] ECHR 655

Links:

Worldlii, Bailii

Jurisdiction:

Human Rights

Human Rights

Updated: 01 July 2022; Ref: scu.227805

Karasova v The Czech Republic: ECHR 30 Nov 2004

ECHR Judgment (Merits and Just Satisfaction) – Violation of Art. 6-1 concerning the length of proceedings; Inadmissible under Art. 6-1 concerning the fairness of the proceedings; Inadmissible under P1-1; Pecuniary damage – claim rejected; Non-pecuniary damage – financial award; Costs and expenses – claim rejected.

Citations:

71545/01, [2004] ECHR 653, [2004] ECHR 653

Links:

Worldlii, Bailii

Jurisdiction:

Human Rights

Human Rights

Updated: 01 July 2022; Ref: scu.227804

Elden v Turkey: ECHR 9 Dec 2004

ECHR Judgment (Merits and Just Satisfaction) – Violation of Art. 10; Violation of Art. 6-1; Not necessary to examine Art. 6-3-b; Pecuniary damage – financial award; Non-pecuniary damage – financial award; Costs and expenses partial award.

Citations:

40985/98, [2004] ECHR 670

Links:

Worldlii, Bailii

Jurisdiction:

Human Rights

Human Rights

Updated: 01 July 2022; Ref: scu.227716

AK and VK v Turkey: ECHR 30 Nov 2004

ECHR Judgment (Merits and Just Satisfaction) – Non violation of Art. 2 with regard to death; Violation of Art. 2 with regard to lack of effective investigation; Non violation of Art. 3; Violation of Art. 13; Pecuniary damage – claim rejected; Non-pecuniary damage – financial award; Costs and expenses partial award.

Citations:

38418/97, [2004] ECHR 648, [2004] ECHR 648

Links:

Worldlii, Bailii

Jurisdiction:

Human Rights

Human Rights

Updated: 01 July 2022; Ref: scu.227742

Bakalov v Ukraine: ECHR 30 Nov 2004

ECHR Judgment (Merits and Just Satisfaction) – Preliminary objections dismissed (victim, non-exhaustion of domestic remedies); Violation of Art. 6-1; Violation of P1-1; Pecuniary damage – financial award; Non-pecuniary damage – financial award.

Citations:

14201/02, [2004] ECHR 649, [2004] ECHR 649

Links:

Worldlii, Bailii

Jurisdiction:

Human Rights

Human Rights

Updated: 01 July 2022; Ref: scu.227800

Klyakhin v Russia: ECHR 30 Nov 2004

ECHR Judgment (Merits and Just Satisfaction) – Violation of Art. 5-3; Violation of Art. 5-4; Violation of Art. 6-1; Violation of Art. 13+6; Violation of Art. 8; No violation of Art. 13+8; Violation of Art. 34; Non-pecuniary damage – financial award; Costs and expenses partial award – Convention proceedings.

Citations:

46082/99, [2004] ECHR 654, [2004] ECHR 654

Links:

Worldlii, Bailii

Jurisdiction:

Human Rights

Human Rights

Updated: 01 July 2022; Ref: scu.227741

Dragicevic v Croatia: ECHR 9 Dec 2004

ECHR Judgment (Merits and Just Satisfaction) – Violation of Art. 6-1; Not necessary to examine Art. 13; Pecuniary damage – claim rejected; Non-pecuniary damage – financial award; Costs and expenses (domestic proceedings) – claim rejected;Costs and expenses partial award – Convention proceedings.

Citations:

11814/02, [2004] ECHR 669

Links:

Worldlii, Bailii

Jurisdiction:

Human Rights

Human Rights

Updated: 01 July 2022; Ref: scu.227717

Zaskiewicz v Poland: ECHR 30 Nov 2004

ECHR Judgment (Merits and Just Satisfaction) – Violation of Art. 6-1; Pecuniary damage – claim rejected; Non-pecuniary damage – financial award; Costs and expenses (domestic proceedings) – claim rejected; Costs and expenses partial award – Convention proceedings.

Citations:

46072/99;46076/99, [2004] ECHR 662, [2004] ECHR 662

Links:

Worldlii, Bailii

Jurisdiction:

Human Rights

Human Rights

Updated: 01 July 2022; Ref: scu.227802

Zovanovic v Croatia: ECHR 9 Dec 2004

ECHR Judgment (Merits and Just Satisfaction) – Violation of Art. 6-1; Not necessary to examine Art. 13; Pecuniary damage – claim rejected; Non-pecuniary damage – financial award; Costs and expenses (domestic proceedings) – claim rejected; Costs and expenses award – Convention proceedings.

Citations:

12877/02, [2004] ECHR 676

Links:

Worldlii, Bailii

Jurisdiction:

Human Rights

Human Rights

Updated: 01 July 2022; Ref: scu.227718

Anagnostopoulos v Greece: ECHR 10 Feb 2005

ECHR Judgment (Merits and Just Satisfaction) – Violation of Art. 6-1; Violation of Art. 13; Non-pecuniary damage – financial award; Costs and expenses (domestic proceedings) – claim rejected; Costs and expenses partial award – Convention proceedings.

Citations:

37429/02, [2005] ECHR 95

Links:

Worldlii, Bailii

Statutes:

European Convention on Human Rights 6.1

Jurisdiction:

Human Rights

Human Rights

Updated: 01 July 2022; Ref: scu.227622

Py v France: ECHR 11 Jan 2005

The claimant, a French national wished to vote in a French overseas territory. Registration was refused because he had not been permanently resident for ten years. The local administration was concerned that ballots should reflect the will of the local population and should not be affected by mass voting by recent arrivals in the territory who did not have strong ties with it. The ten year residence requirement had been laid down ‘after a turbulent political and institutional history’ and had been instrumental in alleviating the ‘bloody conflict’.
Held: The restrictions imposed on the applicant’s right to vote were warranted. The court stated as general principles: ‘Contracting States have a wide margin of appreciation, given that their legislation on elections varies from place to place and from time to time. The rules on granting the right to vote, reflecting the need to ensure both citizen participation and knowledge of the particular situation of the region in question, vary according to the historical and political factors peculiar to each state. The number of situations provided for in the legislation on elections in many member States of the Council of Europe shows the diversity of possible choice on the subject. However, none of these criteria should in principle be considered more valid than any other provided that it guarantees the expression of the will of the people through free, fair and regular elections. For the purposes of applying Art.3, any electoral legislation must be assessed in the light of the political evolution of the country concerned, so that features that would be unacceptable in the context of one system may be justified in the context of another.’ and ‘The State’s margin of appreciation, however, is not unlimited. It is for the Court to determine in the last resort whether the requirements of Protocol No.1 have been complied with. It has to satisfy itself that any such conditions do not curtail the rights in question to such an extent as to impair their very essence and deprive them of their effectiveness; that they are imposed in pursuit of a legitimate aim; and that the means employed are not disproportionate. In particular, such conditions must not thwart ‘the free expression of the opinion of the people in the choice of the legislature’.’

Citations:

66289/01, [2005] ECHR 7, [2006] 42 EHRR 26

Links:

Worldlii, Bailii

Jurisdiction:

Human Rights

Cited by:

Cited – Barclay and Others, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for Justice and others CA 2-Dec-2008
The claimant appealed against refusal of his challenge to the new constitutional law for Sark, and sought a declaration of incompatibility under the 1998 Act. He said that by restricting the people who could stand for election, a free democracy had . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Human Rights, Elections

Updated: 01 July 2022; Ref: scu.227663

Buzatu v Romania: ECHR 27 Jan 2005

ECHR Judgment (Just Satisfaction) – Pecuniary damage – financial award; Non-pecuniary damage – financial award; Costs and expenses partial award – Convention proceedings.

Citations:

34642/97, [2005] ECHR 40

Links:

Worldlii, Bailii

Statutes:

European Convention on Human Rights

Jurisdiction:

Human Rights

Citing:

See Also – Buzatu v Romania ECHR 1-Jun-2004
. .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Human Rights

Updated: 01 July 2022; Ref: scu.227656

Sciacca v Italy: ECHR 11 Jan 2005

The court was asked whether the applicant’s rights under Article 8 had been infringed by the release to the press of an identity photograph taken of her by the Italian Revenue Police while she was under arrest and investigation for various criminal offences. It was a ‘vertical’ application of Article 8.
Revenue police compiled a file on her containing, among other things, her photographs and fingerprints. A public prosecutor held a press conference in which the allegations against the applicant and others were discussed. Photographs from the police file were supplied to newspapers. Following this, two newspapers published the photographs of the applicant in articles which stated that she and others had been charged with serious offences. The case against the applicant ended with a special procedure for imposition of a penalty agreed between the applicant and the prosecution. The penalty involved the imposition of a term of imprisonment and a fine.
Held: The court referred to von Hannover and said: ‘Regarding whether there has been an interference, the Court reiterates that the concept of private life includes elements relating to a person’s right to their picture and that the publication of a photograph falls within the scope of private life. It has also given guidelines regarding the scope of private life and found that there is: ‘a zone of interaction of a person with others, even in a public context, which may fall within the scope of ‘private life’.
In the instant case the applicant’s status as an ‘ordinary person’ enlarges the zone of interaction which may fall within the scope of private life, and the fact that the applicant was the subject of criminal proceedings cannot curtail the scope of such protection.’

Citations:

(2006) 43 EHRR 20, 50774/99, [2005] ECHR 8

Links:

Worldlii, Bailii

Statutes:

European Convention on Human Rights 8

Jurisdiction:

Human Rights

Citing:

Cited – Von Hannover v Germany ECHR 24-Jun-2004
Princess Caroline of Monaco who had, at some time, received considerable attention in the media throughout Europe, complained at the publication of photographs taken of her withour her permission.
Held: There was no doubt that the publication . .

Cited by:

Cited – Murray v Express Newspapers Plc and Another ChD 7-Aug-2007
The claimant, now aged four and the son of a famous author, was photographed by use of a long lens, but in a public street. He now sought removal of the photograph from the defendant’s catalogue, and damages for breach of confidence.
Held: The . .
Cited – Murray v Big Pictures (UK) Ltd; Murray v Express Newspapers CA 7-May-2008
The claimant, a famous writer, complained on behalf of her infant son that he had been photographed in a public street with her, and that the photograph had later been published in a national newspaper. She appealed an order striking out her claim . .
Cited – Marper v United Kingdom; S v United Kingdom ECHR 4-Dec-2008
(Grand Chamber) The applicants complained that on being arrested on suspicion of offences, samples of their DNA had been taken, but then despite being released without conviction, the samples had retained on the Police database.
Held: . .
Cited – JR38, Re Application for Judicial Review (Northern Ireland) SC 1-Jul-2015
The appellant was now 18 years old. In July 2010 two newspapers published an image of him. He was at that time barely 14 years old. These photographs had been published by the newspapers at the request of the police. The publication of the . .
Cited – L, Regina (On the Application of) v Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis SC 29-Oct-2009
Rebalancing of Enhanced Disclosure Requirements
The Court was asked as to the practice of supplying enhanced criminal record certificates under the 1997 Act. It was said that the release of reports of suspicions was a disproportionate interference in the claimants article 8 rights to a private . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Human Rights, Media

Updated: 01 July 2022; Ref: scu.227664

Andreadaki and Others v Greece: ECHR 10 Feb 2005

ECHR Judgment (Merits and Just Satisfaction) – Violation of Art. 6-1 with regard to the length of the proceedings; Inadmissible under Art. 6-1 as regard to the fairness of the proceedings, and under P1-1; Non-pecuniary damage – financial award; Costs and expenses (domestic proceedings) – claim rejected; Costs and expenses (Convention proceedings) – claim rejected.

Citations:

33523/02, [2005] ECHR 74

Links:

Worldlii, Bailii

Statutes:

European Convention on Human Rights 6.1

Jurisdiction:

Human Rights

Human Rights

Updated: 01 July 2022; Ref: scu.227611

Thaler v Austria: ECHR 3 Feb 2005

ECHR Judgment (Merits and Just Satisfaction) – Violation of Art. 6-1; Pecuniary damage – claim rejected; Non-pecuniary damage – finding of violation sufficient; Costs and expenses partial award – domestic proceedings; Costs and expenses partial award – Convention proceedings.

Citations:

58141/00, [2005] ECHR 63

Links:

Worldlii, Bailii

Statutes:

European Convention on Human Rights 6-1

Human Rights

Updated: 01 July 2022; Ref: scu.227581

Stift v Belgium: ECHR 24 Feb 2005

ECHR Judgment (Merits and Just Satisfaction) – Violation of Art. 6-3-c; Violation of Art. 6-1; Not necessary to examine Art. 6-3-d; Pecuniary damage – claim rejected; Non-pecuniary damage – financial award; Costs and expenses partial award – domestic proceedings; Costs and expenses partial award – Convention proceedings.

Citations:

46848/99, [2005] ECHR 140

Links:

Worldlii, Bailii

Jurisdiction:

Human Rights

Human Rights

Updated: 01 July 2022; Ref: scu.227571

Isayeva, Yusupova And Bazayeva v Russia: ECHR 24 Feb 2005

ECHR Judgment (Merits and Just Satisfaction). The court considered the duties of a signatory state under article 2 when taking substantial military actions against insurgents.

Citations:

57949/00, [2005] ECHR 129, 57947/00, 57948/00, (2005) 41 EHRR 39

Links:

Worldlii, Bailii

Statutes:

European Convention on Human Rights 2

Jurisdiction:

Human Rights

Cited by:

Cited – Smith, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for Defence and Oxfordshire Assistant Deputy Coroner (Equality and Human Rights Commission intervening) SC 30-Jun-2010
The deceased soldier died of heat exhaustion whilst on active service in Iraq. It was said that he was owed a duty under human rights laws, and that any coroner’s inquest should be a fuller one to satisfy the state’s duty under Article 2.
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Human Rights, Armed Forces

Updated: 01 July 2022; Ref: scu.227547