Thursday, 2 May 2013

ECtHR case-law weekly brief (29 Apr - 3 May 2013)

Ill-treatment by police officers during criminal proceedings against the applicant and ineffective ensuing investigation (violation of 3 in Samartsev v. RU)

Poor conditions of detention (violation of 3 in Ion Ciobanu v. RO)

Arbitrary detention of Ukraine’s former Prime Minister, lack of proper review of the lawfulness of the measure, lack of possibility to seek compensation and restrictions on the use of her rights applied for other purposes than the ones set out, on account of the detention having mainly served as punishment for her contemptuous behaviour in court (violation of 5 §§ 1, 4 and 5 and of 18 in Tymoshenko v. UKR; no violation of 3 concerning ill treatment allegations due to the applicant’s hindrance in the ensuing investigation at national level)
Detention pending expulsion – unlawfulness of the measure against a minor (violation of 5 § 1 in Barjamaj v. GR) and conditions of detention in the custody of the immigration authorities (violation of 3 in Chkhartishvili v. GR)

Forced placement in a psychiatric hospital following a recommendation of a psychiatrist on duty at the time the applicant was visiting her daughter at the premises and impossibility to attend the proceedings for reviewing the measure due to lack of notification (violation of 5 § 1 in Zagidulina v. RU)

Unlawful detention in police custody prior to the transfer to a hospital for involuntary psychiatric examination (violation of 5 § 1 in Petukhova v. RU)

Deprived access to court due to lengthy review of an application for a patent before the relevant national authority and its subsequent dismissal close to the end of the 20 years’ limit for patent protection (violation of 6 § 1 in Kristiansen and Tyvik As v. NOR)

Non-payment of family allowances to which the applicants were entitled – not in breach of their property rights due to lack of exercise in a timely manner of their right to claim them (no violation of 1 Prot. 1 in Panteliou-Darne and Blandzouka v. GR)

Revision of a judgment of the Court following a sales contract to a third party and compulsory liquidation of the applicant company having occurred previously to the Court’s judgment of 2009 by which it found a violation and reserved the question of just satisfaction (request for revision accepted and case declared inadmissible – Gardean and S.C. Grup 95 S.A. v. RO)

Repetitive cases – lengthy non-enforcement of final domestic judgments (RU), quashing of a final binding judgment (RU), length of proceedings (CRO, GR, RU, UKR)

The Court’s related press releases:

- in Ukraininan
 - in Russian 


No comments:

Post a Comment