Vatan v Russia: ECHR 7 Oct 2004

ECHR Judgment (Preliminary Objections) – Preliminary objection allowed (lack of victim status) – inadmissible.
‘The Court recalls that the term ‘victim’ used in Art. 34 denotes the person directly affected by the act or omission which is at issue. It further recalls that accepting an application from a ‘person’ indirectly affected by the alleged violation will be justified only in exceptional circumstances, in particular where it is clearly established that it is impossible for the direct victim to apply to the Court.’

Citations:

47978/99, [2004] ECHR 504, 2006 42 EHRR 7

Links:

Worldlii, Bailii

Statutes:

European Convention on Human Rights 34

Jurisdiction:

Human Rights

Cited by:

CitedAXA General Insurance Ltd and Others v Lord Advocate and Others SCS 8-Jan-2010
The claimant sought to challenge the validity of the 2009 Act by judicial review. The Act would make their insured and themselves liable to very substantial unanticipated claims for damages for pleural plaques which would not previousl or otherwise . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Human Rights

Updated: 06 September 2022; Ref: scu.227825