Veeber v Estonia (No 2): ECHR 21 Jan 2003

Hudoc Judgment (Merits and just satisfaction) Violation of Art. 7-1 ; Pecuniary damage – claim rejected ; Non-pecuniary damage – financial award ; Costs and expenses award – Convention proceedings
The complainant alleged that, having been convicted for acts which only later became a crime, his convention rights had been infringed. He had been accused of abusing his position within a company to ensure that substantial sums of tax were not paid. The court had convicted him on the basis that the acts were continuing, and had continued after the law changed.
Held: The article 7 rights were prominent in the rights granted. Under the earlier law, he could not have been convicted of a criminal offence unless he had first been dealt with administratively. He had therefore been dealt with more severely. His rights had been infringed. A ‘continuing offence’ is a type of crime committed over a period of time. Damages were awarded.


45771/99, [2003] ECHR 37


Worldlii, Bailii


European Convention on Human Rights 7


Human Rights

Human Rights, Crime

Updated: 30 June 2022; Ref: scu.178765