text stringlengths 332 3.61k | label int64 0 12 |
|---|---|
33. The applicant submitted that, contrary to the applicant in the Loizidou case, himself, his wife and his daughter and son had had their principal residence in the town of Kyrenia. He claimed to be a displaced person under Article <mask> of the Convention and argued that the respondent Government had implicitly admi... | 11 |
2. The applicant’s claim that he had sustained a violation of his right of access to a court under Article 6 § 1 is distinct from the interference with his right to respect for his honour and reputation under Article <mask> of the Convention. Under Article 6 § 1, the applicant complained that he did not have an adequa... | 11 |
63. The Government referred to the Court’s jurisprudence to the effect that where immigration is concerned, Article <mask> of the Convention cannot be considered to impose on a State a general obligation to respect the choice by married couples of the country of their matrimonial residence and to authorise family reun... | 11 |
31. The applicants complained that the loss of their jobs, respectively, as a private-company lawyer and barrister, and the ban under Article 2 of the Law on the Evaluation of the USSR State Security Committee (NKVD, NKGB, MGB, KGB) and the Present Activities of Permanent Employees of the Organisation (“the Act”) on t... | 11 |
22. The applicant complained under Articles 6 § 1 and 13 of the Convention about the outcome of the proceedings. He further complained under Article <mask> of the Convention that he had been unlawfully deprived of the flat. Relying on Article 1 of Protocol No. 1, the applicant alleged that the separation of the proper... | 11 |
130. The applicants complained that the Court’s correspondence had been opened by the prison authorities and that it had been received in a disorderly state; thus, they were not sure that they had had access to all the documents submitted to the Court by the Government. They further alleged that the authorities had st... | 11 |
204. The applicants also complained that the authorities’ failure to maintain the channel of the Pionerskaya river in a proper state of repair and to take appropriate measures to mitigate the risk of floods resulted in the damage done to their homes and property, and that no compensation had been awarded to them for t... | 11 |
28. The applicant complained under Article <mask> of the Convention that the court decisions refusing joint custody had infringed his right to respect for his family life, and under Article 14 read in conjunction with Article 8 of the Convention that the application of Article 1626a § 2 of the Civil Code amounted to u... | 11 |
39. The applicants submitted that the telephone metering of the telephone in B.’s flat constituted an interference with their rights under Article <mask> of the Convention, referring to Malone v. the United Kingdom (judgment of 2 August 1984, Series A no. 82, pp. 30-31, § 64). They conceded that the information was di... | 11 |
145. The Government claimed that the applicant should have lodged a constitutional complaint in order to challenge the constitutionality of Article 217 of the CECS with Article 47 of the Constitution. They referred to the Constitutional Court’s judgment of 2 July 2009 (no. K 1/07), given on an application from the Omb... | 11 |
29. The Government considered that the relationship between the first and second applicants and the first and third applicants did not fall within the scope of “family life” within the meaning of Article <mask> of the Convention. They emphasised that the first and second applicants had separated in May 2009 and were n... | 11 |
111. The Government accepted that there had been an interference with the applicant’s rights under Article <mask> of the Convention. However, they considered that such interference had been lawful and justified. In particular, the secret surveillance orders had been based on Article 180 of the Code of Criminal Procedu... | 11 |
189. The Government referred several times in their written submissions to the fact that the applicant herself disclosed details of the caution to her prospective employer, and that the details she disclosed were merely confirmed by the Criminal Records Office. The Court observes that the posts for which the applicant... | 11 |
31. The applicant maintained that the relevant passage of the High Court's judgment amounted to an affirmation of suspicion that he had committed sexual abuse. Referring to a medical statement of 7 June 2003 (see paragraph 21 above) the applicant submitted that, having been labelled a sexual abuser, he had suffered se... | 11 |
133. The applicant claimed 55,000 euros (EUR) for the non-pecuniary damage suffered as a result of the violation of his rights under the Convention: EUR 20,000 for the violation of Article 3, EUR 30,000 for the violation of Article 5 and EUR 5,000 for the violation of Article <mask> of the Convention. He cited the Cou... | 11 |
35. The applicant submitted that the domestic decisions interfered with his own rights under Article <mask> of the Convention. Both the Federal Institute and the domestic courts had failed to appreciate that he had a personal interest in the decision on his late wife’s request. This personal interest derived from the ... | 11 |
119. The Government did not call into question the applicants' ownership of the property in issue, nor dispute the argument that the persons referred to had entered the house against the applicants' will. The Court is therefore satisfied that the actions of the aforementioned men constituted an interference with the a... | 11 |
25. The Government maintained that the domestic courts applied standards that were in conformity with the principles embodied in Article <mask> of the Convention as interpreted in the Court’s case-law and that the balancing test, between the competing rights protected under Articles 8 and 10 of the Convention, was bas... | 11 |
49. The Government admitted that the national courts’ decision to order the applicant’s eviction had constituted an inference with his right to respect for his “home” under Article <mask> of the Convention. They considered that such interference had been lawful, pursued the legitimate aim of protecting the rights of p... | 11 |
121. The Government asserted that the Russian legal system provided for an effective remedy in respect of the applicants’ grievances under Article <mask> of the Convention. They referred to Chapter 25 of the CCP containing the mechanism for challenging State and municipal authorities’ decisions before the courts. The ... | 11 |
34. The Government submitted that the decision to deny the first applicant continued residence in the Netherlands was necessary in a democratic society and was proportionate. Referring to the guiding principles for cases of this nature as established by the Court (Boultif v. Switzerland, no. 54273/00, § 48, ECHR-2001)... | 11 |
57. The Government informed the Court that the first applicant, Mr E. B., had died on 14 September 2008 and asked the Court to strike the application off the list. They submitted that his application, which essentially concerned complaints under Article 14 read in conjunction with Article <mask> of the Convention, rel... | 11 |
91. The applicant further complained that the facts of the case had given rise to a breach of Article <mask> of the Convention. Her right to respect for her private life and her psychological and moral integrity had been violated by the authorities’ failure to provide her with access to genetic tests in the context of... | 11 |
65. The applicants complained of the Federal Court of Justice’s refusal to prohibit the media outlets concerned from keeping on their respective Internet portals the transcript of the Deutschlandfunk radio programme broadcast at the time of the events and the written reports published in old editions of Der Spiegel an... | 11 |
78. The applicants complained that the facts of the case gave rise to a breach of Article <mask> of the Convention. They submitted that their right to due respect for their private and family life and for the first applicant’s physical and moral integrity had been violated by the absence of a comprehensive legal frame... | 11 |
31. The applicant complained that the authorities had failed to assist him in his efforts to maintain contact with his daughter. He relied on Articles 6 and 8 of the Convention. Since the Court is the master of the characterisation to be given in law to the facts of the case, it does not consider itself bound by the c... | 11 |
39. The applicants submitted that contrary to the Government’s assertion, in order for Article <mask> of the Convention to apply, it was irrelevant that they had not suffered actual injuries, since their physical integrity had been exposed to a clear and imminent danger. The first applicant, Mr Király, was a resident ... | 11 |
36. The applicant complained under Article <mask> of the Convention that his right to respect for his family life had been violated. He claimed, in particular, that the restriction imposed by the domestic courts on his parental rights in respect of his son D. was not “in accordance with the law” and not justified, as ... | 11 |
39. The Government submitted that the interference complained of was justified under Article <mask> of the Convention. In their view, it was in accordance with the law and based on a reasonable suspicion that the first applicant had committed an offence, namely that he had been illegally distributing software. The fir... | 11 |
65. The applicant complained that the allegedly defamatory sworn statements of the police officers that led to the imposition of restrictive measures against him and to a public trial were an attack on his reputation and hence on his private and family life. He argued that there had been a breach of Article <mask> of ... | 11 |
56. The applicants submitted that they had suffered a serious interference with their rights under Article <mask> of the Convention on account of the severe environmental pollution emanating from the thermal power plant in close proximity to their homes and the State’s failure to regulate the hazardous industrial acti... | 11 |
58. The Government argued that protecting individuals from erroneous and defamatory statements corresponded to a pressing social need, even with respect to public figures. They submitted that the domestic courts had thoroughly assessed the disputed statements and had not found sufficient evidence to support them. The ... | 11 |
103. The Government admitted that the national courts’ decisions to order the applicants’ eviction had constituted an inference with their rights set out in Article <mask> of the Convention. They considered that such interference had been lawful, pursued the legitimate aim of protecting the rights of persons eligible ... | 11 |
44. The applicants submitted that the first applicant was integrated in Austria and had a right to an employment permit under Article <mask> of the Convention. They submitted in this regard that the first applicant had lived in Austria since 1992 with an indefinite settlement permit and that his wife, who also lived i... | 11 |
27. The applicants referred firstly to the fact that the domestic courts had established medical negligence in respect of the first applicant. There had thus been a very serious interference with her physical and psychological integrity, as confirmed by the domestic judgments. However, the finding that their rights ha... | 11 |
49. The applicant complained that the decision to divest him of his Maltese citizenship had not been made in accordance with the law. It had interfered with his right to private and family life and exposed him to the risk of being separated from his family. The decision had not been accompanied by the relevant procedu... | 11 |
75. The applicants argued that the taking of the children into public care and their removal from their home were extremely drastic measures. It was not appropriate to refer to investigations done in 1992 and 1993 and to order the contested measures without hearing them or any witnesses as to the arguments put forward... | 11 |
72. The applicant submitted that the authorities should have taken urgent action in accordance with the positive obligations arising out of Article <mask> of the Convention. On the contrary, they had left her in a vulnerable situation despite being aware of the danger she faced. The initial inaction of the authorities... | 11 |
24. The Government submitted at the outset that, in view of the six-month rule contained in Article 35 § 1 of the Convention, the period in respect of which the conditions of the applicant's detention should be examined had started only on 21 March 2006 (i.e. six months before the date on which the application had bee... | 11 |
54. The Government argued that Article <mask> of the Convention did not guarantee a right to receive long-term visits for detainees. They relied on, most notably, the cases of Messina v. Italy (no. 2) (no. 25498/94, ECHR 2000‑X), Klamecki v. Poland (no. 2) (no. 31583/96, 3 April 2003), and Aliev v. Ukraine (no. 41220/... | 11 |
117. The applicant’s situation is rather a specific situation of a stateless migrant who complains that the uncertainty of his situation and the impossibility to regularise his residence status in Croatia following his almost forty-year, at times regular and constantly tolerated, stay in Croatia adversely affects his ... | 11 |
75. The applicant complained that the facts of the case had given rise to a breach of Article <mask> of the Convention. As to the applicability of this provision, the applicant emphasised that the facts underlying the application had concerned a matter of “private life”, a concept which covered the physical and moral ... | 11 |
40. The applicants argued that the interference had not been justified under Article <mask> of the Convention. In particular, they stated that the prosecutor could have interviewed V.E. to verify his statements. They claimed that there had been no reasonable suspicion and therefore no basis for the search-and-seizure ... | 11 |
27. The applicant complained that the time-limit for establishing the paternity of children born before the entry into force of the new Paternity Act on 1 October 1976 gave rise to a violation of his rights under Article 8 as he could not have the paternity established, despite the conclusive DNA tests. Article <mask>... | 11 |
60. The applicant complained in substance under Article <mask> of the Convention, firstly, that the removal of tissue from her husband’s body had been carried out without his or the applicant’s prior consent. Secondly, she complained that ‒ in the absence of such consent ‒ his dignity, identity and integrity had been ... | 11 |
37. The applicant argued that the courts arbitrarily reduced his right of access. As a result of the conduct of the child's mother and the court decisions in the present case, he had been deprived for almost one year of any contact with his daughter. The courts should have made the child's mother aware of her obligati... | 11 |
118. The Government did not contest that the police posting of the applicant’s photograph constituted an interference, within the meaning of Article <mask> of the Convention. However, that interference was justified because it had had been carried out as an “operational investigative measure”. The Government stated th... | 11 |
25. The applicant maintained that her request for information about strictly personal aspects of her history and childhood came within the scope of Article <mask> of the Convention. Establishing her basic identity was an integral part not only of her “private life”, but also of her “family life” with her natural famil... | 11 |
38. The applicant pointed out that he had never had the chance to get acquainted with the full text of his psychological assessments. In fact, it had been exactly the “disturbing, yet unclear and incomplete” information given to him about them that had provoked him to seek the full results. The applicant pointed out a... | 11 |
140. The Government, once again, referred to the Obligations Act, as well as the relevant domestic case-law (see paragraphs 67, 68 and 69 above). Since the applicant had failed to bring a civil case on the basis of this legislation, or indeed directly under Article <mask> of the Convention, the Government argued that ... | 11 |
35. The Government pointed out that it was the ties between the applicant and her two children that had to be considered when examining “the extent to which family life [would be] effectively ruptured” by her expulsion (see Rodrigues da Silva and Hoogkamer, cited above, § 39). While the Government did not dispute that... | 11 |
74. The applicants submitted that, contrary to Article <mask> of the Convention, they had been deprived of a member of their family. Relying on Article 14, taken in conjunction with Articles 2 and 8 of the Convention, they further alleged that Stelios Kalli Panayi had been killed because of his Greek-Cypriot national ... | 11 |
83. The Government further argued that the present case was similar to the case of Guichard v. France ((dec.), no. 56838/00, 2 September 2003) where the applicant had not been able to rely on the protection afforded by the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction and where the Court had f... | 11 |
33. The applicant alleged that he was the victim of interference with the exercise of his right to respect for his private life within the meaning of Article <mask> of the Convention. He did not share the Government’s view that other options for ending his life were available to him. He considered that the ingestion o... | 11 |
124. The applicant did not claim that the respondent State had interfered with his family relations with A.P. directly: he accepted that it was clear that the interference had to be attributed to a private individual, Ms E.P. The applicant argued, however, that the respondent State had failed to meet its positive obli... | 11 |
41. The applicants also invoked Article <mask> of the Convention without specifying the nature of their grievances. Having regard to all the material in its possession, the Court finds that there is no indication of a violation of this provision. It follows that this part of the application must be rejected as being m... | 11 |
128. The applicant complained under Article <mask> of the Convention, cited above, about restrictions on his correspondence and exchange of documents with his counsel. Relying on copies of three of the intercepted letters addressed to his mother, he maintained that they had not contained any subversive information or ... | 11 |
135. The applicants alleged that the disappearance of their relative had amounted to a violation of their right to respect for family life. They also complained that the search carried out at their house on 11 January 2003 had been illegal and constituted a violation of their right to respect for their home. It thus d... | 11 |
688. The applicants MM Elçi, Tur, Acar, Çem and Kurbanoğlu contended that the search of their homes and offices was of doubtful lawfulness, given the lack of clear authority from a Prosecutor or Judge, the need to protect the confidentiality of the client/lawyer relationship, the bad faith which tainted the arrest deci... | 11 |
102. The applicant's complaint concerning her inability to enjoy family life with her son Balavdi Ustarkhanov concerns the same facts as those examined above under Articles 2 and 3 of the Convention. Having regard to its above findings under these provisions, the Court considers that this complaint should be declared ... | 11 |
139. The applicant also alleges a violation of Article 6 § 1 of the Convention in respect of the various criminal and civil proceedings initiated against the bailiff, the lawyer representing M.S. and the prosecutors investigating the case. He also complained, under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention, that the domestic de... | 11 |
54. The applicant therefore cannot be said to have suffered from the lack of long-term conjugal visits. It follows that he cannot claim to be a victim of a violation of Article <mask> of the Convention in relation to his complaint regarding the lack of conjugal visits from his partner (see Burden v. the United Kingdom... | 11 |
84. The applicant thus concluded that, in the circumstances of her case, the general interests of the Netherlands State did not outweigh the rights of the applicant and her family under Article 8 and that insufficient weight had been given to the best interests of her children. The outcome reached by the Netherlands a... | 11 |
88. The Government submitted that the right to exercise administrative functions in a court did not fall within the ambit of Article <mask> of the Convention. In contrast to the cases of Oleksandr Volkov (cited above) and Özpınar v. Turkey (no. 20999/04, 19 October 2010), the applicant in the present case had not been... | 11 |
70. The Government reiterated their argument concerning the unreasonableness of the applicant’s allegations under Article <mask> of the Convention. They further argued that the amount claimed in relation to non‑pecuniary damage was excessive in the light of awards made by the Court in comparable cases. As regards the ... | 11 |
101. The applicant further complained of the fact that there had been an interference with his right to respect for his home. In particular, he contended that the search on 29 December 1999 of his apartment was performed in contravention of domestic law, because there was a lack of legal justification, the applicable ... | 11 |
73. The Government referred to Ms L.’s right, under Article <mask> of the Convention, to respect for private and family life. The impact of the libel on her had been enormous, causing also great harm and distress to her family. The Government considered that this aspect of the case, which engaged the positive obligati... | 11 |
52. The applicant’s case was considered by no fewer than five different Russian courts, including the Supreme Court and the Constitutional Court. In the first round of proceedings, the courts in the Krasnodar region applied a formalistic and uninquisitive approach, considering themselves bound by the assessment made b... | 11 |
85. The Government accepted that the applicant had family life in the Netherlands within the meaning of Article <mask> of the Convention. Since she was still in the process of seeking a first admission for residence purposes, the pertinent question was whether the Netherlands authorities were under a positive obligati... | 11 |
64. The Government contested that claim and submitted that the refusal to authorise gender reassignment surgery on the ground that the statutory conditions were not satisfied could not be said to constitute interference with the exercise of the right to respect for private life within the meaning of Article <mask> of ... | 11 |
212. The Government further contended that the alleged interference with the applicants’ rights had been lawful, given that the counter-terrorism measures within the territory of the Chechen Republic had been taken on the basis of the Suppression of Terrorism Act (see paragraph 138 above) and “relevant legal instrumen... | 11 |
57. The applicant complained that, owing to the negligence of Dr L., she was denied adequate and timely medical care in the form of an antenatal screening test which would have indicated the risk of her foetus having a genetic disorder and which would have allowed her to choose whether to continue the pregnancy. She a... | 11 |
155. The applicants alleged that the disappearance of their relative had amounted to a violation of their right to family life. They also complained that the search carried out at their house on 8 September 2002 had been illegal and constituted a violation of their right to respect for their home. It thus disclosed a ... | 11 |
58. The Government maintained that there had been no violation of Article <mask> of the Convention. They contended that the competent bodies had taken all the necessary steps and had used the available mechanism under domestic law for the enforcement of interim order of 27 December 2005, all the while taking care of t... | 11 |
33. The applicant complained of her inability to obtain non-identifying information about her birth family. She maintained that she had suffered severe damage as a result of not knowing her personal history. She stated that she had been denied access to non-identifying information about her birth mother and family tha... | 11 |
41. The Government further held that the refusal of the residence permits for the three children on the ground of family reunification was proportionate under Article <mask> of the Convention and in accordance with their right to control the entry of non-nationals into their territory. The Government reiterated that t... | 11 |
30. The Government submitted, firstly, that they were aware of the Court’s judgments in the cases of Taşkın and Others v. Turkey (no. 46117/99, ECHR 2004‑X); Öçkan and Others (cited above); and Lemke v. Turkey (no. 17381/02, 5 June 2007). However, they noted that the Ovacık gold mine had started operating twenty years... | 11 |
66. The Government were convinced that the conduct of the domestic courts had not violated Article <mask> of the Convention. They submitted that the applicant had agreed to a no-fault divorce and for years had not questioned the ruling concerning his contact with his son. In addition, the applicant had not visited his... | 11 |
140. The applicants also relied on Article <mask> of the Convention taken alone, complaining that the refusal to grant the second applicant a residence permit in Denmark violated their right to respect for their family life. However, in the light of the conclusion set out in the previous paragraph, the Court is of the... | 11 |
58. The Government maintained that the Chamber, in applying the necessity test under Article <mask> of the Convention, had exceeded its power of review and had substituted its own evaluation for that of the domestic courts. Although stricter scrutiny was called for as regards restrictions placed by those authorities o... | 11 |
126. The applicant complained, under Article <mask> of the Convention, about the interference by the prison authorities with his right to communicate in private with his lawyer. He was only able to talk to him through a glass partition with holes which prevented normal discussion. In his opinion, there were no guarant... | 11 |
58. The applicant considered that there had been a disproportionate interference with his right to respect for his private and family life and his home. He complained in particular that, for more than five years following the allegedly unlawful entry into his flat, he had been unable to occupy it and that he and his w... | 11 |
16. The applicants complained that the way in which their two children had been killed by soldiers and the authorities’ subsequent refusal to allow them to bury their children in a cemetery of their choice ‒ exacerbated by the fact that they had been prevented from holding a religious ceremony ‒ had represented an unj... | 11 |
30. The applicant complained that the re-seizure of 7 March 2012 had been incompatible with his rights under Article <mask> of the Convention, in particular because (i) it concerned private and legally privileged material, (ii) it had been against the object and purpose of the Constitutional Court’s judgment of 2010, ... | 11 |
53. The applicant complained that the authorities had failed to apply relevant, in particular criminal-law, measures against the participants of the anti-Roma rallies so as to discourage them from the racist harassment that eventually took place. She also maintained that by failing to properly investigate this inciden... | 11 |
26. The applicant claimed that there had been a violation of Article <mask> of the Convention on account of the fact that when collecting and recording information concerning his identity the authorities had refused to register his Romanian ethnic identity and forced on him an ethnic identity with which he did not ide... | 11 |
34. The applicant complained that his allegations in respect of Article 3 also gave rise to a violation of Article <mask> of the Convention. In addition, he complained about restrictions on telephone calls. As regards the latter, the applicant submitted that he had often been under pressure from other inmates to termi... | 11 |
31. The applicants complained that their right to respect for their home and their right to the peaceful enjoyment of their possessions had been infringed as they had been unable to regain possession of their house for many years and it had subsequently been sold without their consent. They relied on Article <mask> of ... | 11 |
96. The Government referred to the Court's previous case-law (the above-cited Rees, Cossey and Sheffield and Horsham judgments) and maintained that neither Article 12 nor Article <mask> of the Convention required a State to permit a transsexual to marry a person of his or her original sex. They also pointed out that t... | 11 |
52. The applicant reiterated that her application only concerned the search of her home, not the seizure of items. There were no explicit or, for that matter, any provisions or case-law even suggesting that a person subject to a search could have access to a court in order to challenge that search. It was true that th... | 11 |
44. The applicants complained that the withdrawal of parts of their parental authority and the subsequent separation of the children and their parents had been disproportionate and not grounded on a sufficient factual basis, but on general considerations about the Twelve Tribes Church and their religious beliefs. They... | 11 |
105. The applicant complained under Article 8 that all his correspondence had been read by State officials and that a large number of his complaints and applications to various State authorities and a letter to his counsel, Ms Liptser, had not been sent to the addressees at all. He referred to Rule 12 of the 2001 Inte... | 11 |
50. The applicant complained under Article 5 § 1 and Article <mask> of the Convention that his administrative arrest of April 1997 and the search of his apartment in April 1997 had been unlawful. He also raised complaints under Article 6 § 3 (b) and (d), claiming that his right to prepare for a hearing before the regi... | 11 |
53. The applicants further complained under Article <mask> of the Convention about having been denied any access to their children during their placement in public care. They further complained under Article 14 of the Convention about having been discriminated against vis à vis parents of German origin. They finally co... | 11 |
35. The Government thus maintained that in the present case the applicant’s deportation from the territory of Lithuania had corresponded to the legitimate aim of protecting the interests of national security. On 11 June 2002 the State Security Department had started an investigation into the applicant, who was suspect... | 11 |
59. The applicants complained that the Norwegian immigration authorities’ decision, upheld by the national courts, that the first applicant be expelled to Ghana with a prohibition on re-entry for five years would entail a breach of their rights under Article <mask> of the Convention. It would disrupt the relationships... | 11 |
49. The Government noted that the applicant alleged a violation of the State’s positive obligations under Article <mask> of the Convention. However, what was at stake in the present case was a weighing of the applicant’s interests protected by Article 8 on the one hand against the freedom of the press to disseminate i... | 11 |
61. The applicant complained under Article <mask> of the Convention that due to the belated enforcement of the final custody judgment of 5 May 2006, as well as the respondent State's prior failure to enforce the NSCC's order of 8 March 2005, she had been prevented from exercising her parental rights in accordance with... | 11 |
59. The applicant complained that the Polish authorities had failed to take effective steps to enforce his right to contact with his daughter and that the process of enforcing the courts' decisions had lasted too long. He alleged a violation of Article 6 § 1 of the Convention. However, the Court considers that the app... | 11 |
93. The Government maintained that the national authorities had done everything within their power to ensure that the applicant could exercise her access rights. They submitted that in a case involving enforcement of access rights a fair balance had to be struck between the competing interests of the children and of th... | 11 |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.