text stringlengths 332 3.61k | label int64 0 12 |
|---|---|
118. The Government submitted that the decision to grant a residence order in respect of the second applicant in favour of the mother had been based on the best interests of the child. There had therefore been no discrimination. The Government referred to the case of Tiemann v. France and Germany ((dec.), nos. 47457/9... | 11 |
30. The applicants submitted that the relationship between the first and second applicants came within the scope of Article <mask> of the Convention because they remained married and had chosen to maintain regular contact with each other, including in order to continue jointly raising their young daughter. The ties be... | 11 |
145. The applicant contended that the regime covering covert surveillance between a detainee who was a “vulnerable person” within the meaning of the Code of Practice and an “appropriate adult” (see paragraph 13 above) was not “in accordance with the law” as required by paragraph 2 of Article <mask> of the Convention. ... | 11 |
35. The applicant organisation complained that the entry of police officers onto its premises and the seizure of documents, public notary fees and taxes, as well as the questioning of its staff members, were unlawful, had impinged on its duty of professional secrecy and had breached its right to home, private life and... | 11 |
28. The applicants also submitted that the twin daughters should, under Article <mask> of the Convention, be entitled to regular contact with their father. Moreover, the first applicant had become the father of a third child in 2012, from a relationship with another Swiss national. He was now living with her and they ... | 11 |
25. The applicant complained about the courts’ judgments in the proceedings under the Media Act refusing him compensation in respect of the publication of an article and two photographs in the issue of Profil of 12 July 2004. He alleged a violation of his right to respect for his private life as guaranteed by Article ... | 11 |
43. The Government did not deny that the notion of private life, which was also referred to in Article <mask> of the Convention, could sometimes encompass information enabling a person’s physical or social identity to be established. However, they pointed out that the State had not refused to furnish the applicant wit... | 11 |
56. The applicant complained under Articles 5 §§ 1, 3 and 4 of the Convention that his detention at the Kumkapı Foreigners’ Admission and Accommodation Centre had no legal basis and that there were no judicial remedies available to him to challenge the lawfulness of his detention. He maintained under Article 5 § 5 of ... | 11 |
33. The applicant complained that his observation via GPS and its aggregation with several further measures of surveillance, as well as the use of the data obtained thereby in the criminal proceedings against him, had breached his right to respect for his private life as provided in Article <mask> of the Convention, w... | 11 |
73. The applicant complained of a violation of Article <mask> of the Convention. In particular, he submitted that the construction of a cemetery near his house had led to the contamination of his supply of drinking water and water used for private gardening purposes, preventing him from making normal use of his home a... | 11 |
13. The applicant complained under Articles 6 § 3 (c) and 8 of the Convention that letters from his lawyers and from the Registry of the Court had been opened and read by the administration of Lovech Prison. The Court is of the view that the complaint falls to be examined solely under Article <mask> of the Convention,... | 11 |
31. The Government submitted that the interference with the applicant’s rights under Article <mask> of the Convention had had a legal basis in Articles 32, 33 and 34 of the Constitution of 1991 and the relevant provisions of the CCP, which were fully in line with the requirements of the Convention. The interference ha... | 11 |
56. The Government contested these arguments and maintained that the apartment block in question had not been an illegal construction although the administrative proceedings concerning the building permit disclosed some irregularities of a procedural nature. They submitted that the major part of the land in question h... | 11 |
44. The applicant maintained that the reversal of the award for damages in respect of his dismissal from the Police Force because he had allegedly been negligent towards the acts of torture committed by other officers in his control, was plainly incompatible with the respondent State’s obligations under Article <mask>... | 11 |
89. The applicant complained that her right to respect for her private and family life had been violated as a result of her sterilisation, which had been carried out contrary to the requirements of the relevant law and without her and her mother’s full and informed consent. She relied on Article <mask> of the Conventi... | 11 |
66. The applicant complained that the domestic authorities had failed to secure his right to respect for his family life guaranteed by Article <mask> of the Convention in that they had not acted expeditiously in the non-contentious proceedings for the return of his son under the Hague Convention. He also complained th... | 11 |
38. The applicants, without relying on any particular provision of the Convention, complain that their dismissal based on the allegation of the commission of criminal offences for which they have been acquitted brought great shame on them and that it deprived them of their material well-being. The Court, being a maste... | 11 |
41. The applicant also complained under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention about the courts’ assessment of the evidence and interpretation of the law and challenged the outcome of the proceedings. She further complained under Articles 3 and 14 of the Convention of her own suffering and discrimination allegedly caused by ... | 11 |
39. The applicant complained that there was a breach of his right to respect of family life in that the domestic courts failed to correctly apply the Hague Convention criteria when deciding on his request for a return order. The complaint falls to be examined under Article <mask> of the Convention. He also claimed und... | 11 |
77. The applicants complained, firstly, that their children had been placed in care unjustifiably, and, secondly, by a letter of 12 April 2012, that they had been unable to obtain the children’s return to their family, given the dismissal of their action by the Bucharest Court of Appeal in a final judgement of 20 Marc... | 11 |
110. The applicants asserted that Article <mask> of the Convention guaranteed the right to a normal family life and was therefore applicable to the present case, regard being had in particular to the Court’s extensive view of the question. They argued that the Law of 4 March 2002 had infringed that right and constitut... | 11 |
64. The applicants complained that the decisions of the domestic courts in the main proceedings to withdraw parts of their parental authority had been disproportionate and had been based on unfair proceedings that had lacked sufficient factual foundation. They further alleged that their religious beliefs were the reas... | 11 |
169. The applicant complained under Article 6 § 3 (a) of the Convention that he had not been informed promptly of the nature and cause of the accusation against him in the second set of proceedings. He also complained under Article 7 that, in both sets of criminal proceedings, the acts for which he had been convicted ... | 11 |
28. The applicants complained under Article <mask> of the Convention that their right to family life had been infringed as a result of the Austrian courts’ decisions to refuse them access to their former foster child. They also submitted that the conduct of the Austrian courts amounted to a breach of the “reasonable t... | 11 |
80. The applicant complained that he had not been allowed to meet in private with his lawyer and had been separated from him by a glass partition, preventing normal discussion or work with documents. As a result they had had to shout to hear each other and had both refused on several occasions to meet in such conditio... | 11 |
56. The applicants initially complained that the first applicant’s expulsion to Turkey would entail a violation not only of Article 8 but also of Articles 2 and 3 of the Convention. However, after his expulsion to Turkey on 16 July 2011, they submitted in their pleadings to the Court of 18 October 2011 that they only ... | 11 |
41. The Government said in conclusion that the child's persistent refusal to see her mother was the only reason why the access arrangements had not been complied with. It would be going beyond the State's positive obligations under Article <mask> of the Convention to take coercive measures to force the child to meet h... | 11 |
51. The applicants complained of a violation of Article <mask> of the Convention by reason of the unlawful search at their apartment and the failure to investigate properly their complaint concerning that search. They further complained that, in relation to the search on 2 November, that the warrant issued was both im... | 11 |
17. The Government submitted that there had been no violation of Article <mask> of the Convention. The eviction order had been in accordance with the law; it had pursued a legitimate aim and had been necessary in order to protect the rights of individuals in need of housing. The Government also pointed out that the app... | 11 |
28. The applicant claimed that the Swiss authorities had not complied with their obligations, inherent in Article <mask> of the Convention, to allow him to reside in Switzerland, thereby enabling him to enjoy family and private life in that country. He submitted that his personal interests in remaining in Switzerland ... | 11 |
20. The applicant maintained under Article <mask> of the Convention that his appointment to the new post -which had compelled him to move to another city- as well as alleged unfounded accusations against him, had interfered with his right to respect for family life. He further claimed that financial consequences arisi... | 11 |
58. The Government averred that the applicants’ complaint under Article 8 refers only to the fact that the alleged perpetrators had been acquitted and that the applicants had been forced to leave town in order to protect the first applicant after the incidents. In their view, these aspects should not fall within the r... | 11 |
78. The applicant stated that her inability to effectively opt for any alternative model of childbirth and the requirement for her to surrender to the obstetric model of birth care in hospital – causing her to experience obstetric violence – represented a serious breach of her right to decide on the circumstances in w... | 11 |
52. The Government submitted that the applicant had failed to substantiate her complaint under Article <mask> of the Convention by specifying any particular consequences that the police decision had had on her private life. Moreover, the police decision predominantly consisted of allegations made by the applicant's hu... | 11 |
42. The applicants submitted that the second 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 second applicant had been legally residing in Austria since 1991 and had a wife and a daughter in Austria who, in the i... | 11 |
84. The Government objected that the scope of the applicant’s original complaint under Article <mask> of the Convention, as expressed in his initial submission and defined by the Court’s admissibility decision, did not cover his subsequent objections in respect of the continued existence of his StB file in the State’s... | 11 |
34. The Government claimed that the interference with the applicant’s right to respect for her home had been proportionate and “necessary in a democratic society” because the applicant had moved into the flat unlawfully and she had had an alternative place in which to live. In addition, the interference had aimed to p... | 11 |
33. The applicant complained of ill-treatment by the police which had seriously endangered his life and had led to serious consequences for his health. He also complained of the lack of an effective investigation into his allegations. The applicant further submitted that there had been a violation of Article <mask> of... | 11 |
45. The applicant also complained under Articles 3, 6 and 13 of the Convention that his appeal against the judgment of 8 June 2004 had not been examined. In his letter of 30 October 2006 the applicant complained under Article <mask> of the Convention about monitoring of his correspondence with a non-governmental organ... | 11 |
56. The applicants’ complaints concerning the procedure followed by the Italian courts were communicated to the Government under Article <mask> of the Convention, which, whilst it contains no explicit procedural requirements, requires that the decision-making process leading to measures of interference must be fair an... | 11 |
26. The Government submitted that the applicant had not been subject to any physical or verbal violence subsequent to the publication of the article. They further maintained that the applicant had requested the public prosecutor’s office to punish the author of the article published in the Bolu Express and had not req... | 11 |
92. The Government of Cyprus submitted that the killing of Solomos Solomou, a member of the applicants’ family, was a deliberate action destroying the family unit as such, which violated Article <mask> of the Convention. They furthermore submitted that, in breach of Article 14 of the Convention, the Turkish authoritie... | 11 |
37. The applicant submitted that the searches at his office and apartment constituted an interference with his rights guaranteed under Article <mask> of the Convention. He considered that, while pursuing a legitimate aim under paragraph 2 of that Article, the interference was neither “in accordance with the law”, nor ... | 11 |
120. The applicants did not allege a lack of effective domestic remedies in respect of their complaint under Article <mask> of the Convention. The Court decided of its own motion to examine this question under Article 13 in the present case (see, for a similar approach, Burdov v. Russia (no. 2), no. 33509/04, § 89, EC... | 11 |
52. The applicants complained that the freeing order was a disproportionate interference with their rights guaranteed by Article <mask> of the Convention because the domestic authorities failed to keep their assessment of their family situation under review and because the reasons given by the trial judge were neither ... | 11 |
24. The Government did not dispute the applicability of Article <mask> of the Convention to the circumstances of the present case. They submitted, however, that the applicants could hardly be considered as having been adversely affected by the absence of the possibility to have long-term family visits, given that they... | 11 |
89. The applicant complained under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention of the outcome of the criminal proceedings brought by him against his former wife in so far as he stated that the authorities had shown themselves to be partial and to favour his wife, and that the same facts as those which constituted the alleged viol... | 11 |
45. The applicant complained under Article <mask> of the Convention that not being allowed long-stay visits from his partner and his sister had caused him intolerable mental and physical suffering. He also complained, under Article 8 taken in conjunction with Article 14, that his entitlement in that connection had bee... | 11 |
47. The applicant also contested the argument that there was a public interest in the article at issue. Even if there were a public debate about the occurrences at the seminary or about the moral standards proclaimed by the Roman Catholic Church in respect of homosexuality, this did not justify attacking him in a defa... | 11 |
73. The Government further submitted that the present case was different from the case of Görgülü v. Germany, (no. 74969/01, 26 February 2004), where the Court had found a violation of Article <mask> of the Convention, because by contrast to the Görgülü case, the child in the present case was older than ten years of a... | 11 |
143. The applicants’ complaint concerning their inability to enjoy family life with Arbi Karimov 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 admissible. H... | 11 |
104. The applicants complained that the State authorities had not complied with their procedural positive obligation under Article 3 and/or Article <mask> of the Convention in that they had refused to prosecute the first applicant’s father for the criminal offence of child abuse he had committed against her. They also... | 11 |
19. The applicant alleged that there had been a breach of his right to respect for his private life on account of the order to provide a biological sample for inclusion in the FNAEG and the fact that his refusal to comply with that order has resulted in a criminal conviction. He relied on Article <mask> of the Convent... | 11 |
116. The applicants invoked Article <mask> of the Convention, arguing that the abuse suffered by them in their private and family life and the local authority’s lack of action to prevent that abuse was a violation of their right to respect for their physical and moral integrity. They had needed protection from the ass... | 11 |
49. The applicants complained that their separation during the ten days that the second applicant was in hospital violated their right to respect for their private and family life under Article <mask> of the Convention. The second applicant further complained that the decision to take a blood sample and photographs wi... | 11 |
57. The applicant complained that the domestic authorities had failed to secure her right to respect for her family life in that: (a) they had not taken any measures to facilitate the voluntary return of her children; (b) the domestic courts had not acted expeditiously in the proceedings for the return of children; an... | 11 |
28. The Government argued that the German courts had not failed to protect the applicant’s right under Article <mask> of the Convention when they had refused his request for an injunction. The courts had extensively examined his action in line with the Court’s case-law regarding balancing Articles 8 and 10 of the Conv... | 11 |
14. The applicant also complained of a violation of his right to respect for his family life resulting from the length of the proceedings complained of. He relied on Article <mask> of the Convention. In particular, he submitted that due to the unreasonable length of the proceedings, his company went bankrupt, and that... | 11 |
40. The applicant alleged that he had not been provided with an opportunity to appeal against the decision of 31 May 2002, in contravention of Articles 3, 5 and 6 of the Convention. He further complained under Article <mask> of the Convention that Dr. N's visit to his flat on 5 June 2002 had been an interference with ... | 11 |
73. The applicants submitted that the second applicant’s detention also violated Article <mask> of the Convention as it constituted disproportionate interference with their right to respect for their private and family life. The Belgian State was or should have been aware of the first applicant’s refugee status in Can... | 11 |
105. The applicant submitted that the prolonged distress and anguish caused by his son's disappearance over the past eleven years amounted to a violation of his right to respect for family life within the meaning of Article <mask> of the Convention. According to the applicant, this breach was the direct result of the ... | 11 |
82. The applicants claimed 60,000 euros (EUR) (EUR 20,000 each) in respect of the non‑pecuniary damage arising out of the violation of Article <mask> of the Convention. They submitted that their physical separation had engendered feelings of loneliness and hopelessness. The second applicant had had to take sedatives f... | 11 |
43. The applicants complained that the exclusion order against the first applicant gave rise to a violation of Article <mask> of the Convention. The applicants further complained that their separation as a result of the exclusion order caused both of them irreparable mental harm and therefore constituted inhuman and d... | 11 |
59. The applicant stressed in particular that the interference with his private and family life had not been in accordance with the law, had not pursued a legitimate aim and had been disproportionate. He pointed out that although he had been dismissed as a result of the withdrawal of his canonical mandate, this measur... | 11 |
51. The Government claimed that the applicant’s complaint under Article <mask> of the Convention was inadmissible for non-exhaustion of domestic remedies. In particular, in connection with the first aspect of the complaint concerning the period of his pre-trial detention, they submitted that the applicant had never re... | 11 |
53. The applicant resided in Switzerland between 1989 and 2008, that is to say for more than eighteen years – with a short interruption in 1993-94 – and he worked and raised his family there. The Court has therefore no reason to doubt that the applicant had established social, professional and family ties in the resp... | 11 |
45. The Government disagreed that there had been an interference with the applicant’s rights under Article <mask> of the Convention on account of the restriction of the confidentiality of his meetings with his lawyer. The Government submitted that, were the Court to find that there had been an interference, it had bee... | 11 |
175. The applicants maintained that the Social Welfare Board and the courts failed to carry out a proper examination of the applicants’ request for reunification of their family, and thus exceeded their margin of appreciation. The applicants stressed that taking into care should be regarded as a temporary measure to b... | 11 |
48. The applicants complained that the Supreme Court, in its decision of 15 October 1996 in the enforcement proceedings, had ordered a review of questions which had already been dealt with in the final return order under the Hague Convention and that this review had eventually led to the non-enforcement of the return ... | 11 |
73. The applicant also alleged that the ex-officio reopening of the social security proceedings, which had resulted in the quashing of the final decision granting her a right to a pension, was in breach of the principle of legal certainty under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention. She also complained under Article <mask>... | 11 |
57. The applicant complained under Article <mask> of the Convention that the written obligation not to abscond and the seizure of his international travel passports constituted an unlawful and disproportionate interference with his private and family life, which was largely concentrated in another country. He emphasis... | 11 |
210. The applicants further maintained that the third applicant’s right to respect for her home under Article <mask> of the Convention and their right to peaceful enjoyment of possessions under Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 had been violated, as the means employed by the authorities had been disproportionate to the aims... | 11 |
45. The applicants asserted that, regardless of the danger to one’s health, the deterioration of the environment fell to be examined under Article <mask> of the Convention where it adversely affected one’s life. They agreed that Article 8 was not violated every time environmental deterioration occurred. They understoo... | 11 |
44. The Government acknowledged that the impugned court decisions had amounted to an interference with the applicant’s right to freedom of expression. However, the interference had been prescribed by law and had pursued the legitimate aim of protecting the reputation of A.L., as guaranteed by Article <mask> of the Con... | 11 |
47. The Government submitted that there had been no violation of Article <mask> of the Convention. The eviction order had been in accordance with the law, it had pursued a legitimate aim and had been necessary in order to protect the rights of forced migrants. The housing occupied by the applicants was federal propert... | 11 |
203. The Government claimed that the interference with the applicant’s home had been justified under paragraph 2 of Article <mask> of the Convention. Thus, the applicant had been suspected of having organised in 1999 the embezzlement of property and shares of several companies active in the oil industry. The applicant... | 11 |
154. The applicants complained that the search of their house carried out by Russian servicemen on 20 July 2004 breached their right to respect for their home. The fifth, seventh, eighth and tenth applicants complained that the killing of their father breached their right to respect for family life. They relied on Art... | 11 |
102. The applicants, referring to the Court's case-law, submitted that they were entitled to the protection of Article <mask> of the Convention as they were a family, had at all relevant times permanently lived together and had been financially dependent on one another. The existence of true family life between the ap... | 11 |
46. The applicants further complained of violations of Articles 6, 8, 13 and 14 of the Convention. In this connection, they alleged that they had been denied a fair trial as a result of the national courts’ decisions based on the opinion of the Ministry of Justice. The interference in question had also constituted a b... | 11 |
103. The applicant also complained that the search constituted unjustified interference with her right to respect for her home and private life, as protected by Article <mask> of the Convention. She noted that her laptop, which had been seized, contained private information which she did not consider was necessary for... | 11 |
81. The Government disagreed. They accepted that the first applicant’s psychiatric examination constituted interference with his private life within the meaning of Article <mask> of the Convention. They argued, however, that this interference was justified under paragraph 2 of the provision at issue. In particular, th... | 11 |
27. The applicants complained that their right to respect for family life had been violated by their separation from their child, that their right to moral and physical integrity under the private life aspect had been violated, that their right to reputation had been violated, affecting their right to establish and de... | 11 |
30. The applicant complained that her and her minor son’s eviction had been ordered by the courts unfairly and without their personal situation being taken into account. She also complained that the process of enforcing the eviction order had been brutal and arbitrary. The applicant invoked a number of the Convention ... | 11 |
153. The applicants maintained that the search conducted at their home had not been “in accordance with the law” and could not be regarded as being necessary in a democratic society and had therefore been in breach of Article <mask> of the Convention. They also contended that the first applicant could claim to be a vi... | 11 |
11. The Government contended that the applicant had not exhausted domestic remedies. They maintained that, in the context of the criminal proceedings against the applicant, the High Court could only examine the conformity of the interception with the legal norms then in force and that no complaint under Article <mask>... | 11 |
59. The applicant stressed the social and economic problems she faced on account of her illegal status in Latvia. She could not work legally or receive allowances or social security benefits; moreover, she lived under constant threat of losing the only accommodation she had. With regard to the regularisation of her da... | 11 |
41. The applicant complained of a breach of Article <mask> of the Convention on account of the outcome and the length of the Hague Convention proceedings. The applicant also argued that the breach of Article 8 of the Convention resulted from the domestic court’s decisions to entertain E.N.’s divorce petition and to is... | 11 |
25. The applicants complained that the refusal of the Supreme Court of Cassation to allow the second applicant to travel abroad had breached their right to respect for their private and family life, as provided for in Article <mask> of the Convention, and that they did not have an effective remedy in this respect. The... | 11 |
58. The Government relied on the Court’s case-law in cases against Latvia to argue that the circumstances of the present case were different from cases where the Court found a violation of Article <mask> of the Convention (Lavents v. Latvia, no. 58442/00, 28 November 2002; Moisejevs, cited above; and Kornakovs v. Latv... | 11 |
77. The applicant claimed that the refusal to exempt her from the obligation to hold a provisional residence visa and the refusal to admit her to the Netherlands breached her right under Article <mask> of the Convention. Her intention had been from the outset to settle in the Netherlands with her partner, later her hu... | 11 |
67. The Government submitted that the case revealed no violation of Article <mask> of the Convention. While they accepted that the relevant domestic decisions constituted an interference with the applicant’s right to respect for her family life, they contended that they had been in accordance with domestic law and pur... | 11 |
74. The Government argued that the applicant had failed to exhaust effective domestic remedies. In particular, he could have appealed against the court decision of 6 December 2004 authorising the interception of his mobile telephone communications. The fact that the applicant had not been provided with a copy of that ... | 11 |
31. 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 |
28. The applicant complained under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention of the manner in which the national court had decided on his claim against the company operating the mine. He complained furthermore under Article <mask> of the Convention of an infringement of his right to a home. Lastly, he complained under Article 1... | 11 |
18. The Government did not make any submissions under this head on their observations on the merits of the case. In their earlier observations on the admissibility of the application, however, the Government had made limited submissions under this head. In particular, they disputed the applicant’s complaint under Arti... | 11 |
90. The applicants complained that their allegations in respect of Article 3 also gave rise to a violation of Article <mask> of the Convention. In addition, they complained about restrictions on visits and telephone calls. As regards the latter, the applicants submitted that they had had the right to use a telephone o... | 11 |
16. The applicant argued that neither the prosecution authorities nor the District Court had carried out a thorough examination of his criminal complaint. As a result, his right to reputation, which the Hungarian authorities were under an obligation to protect pursuant to Article <mask> of the Convention, had been vio... | 11 |
134. The Government considered that there had been no interference with the applicant’s right to respect for her private life and her home, because the level of noise and other alleged nuisance had not attained the minimum level of severity required by Article <mask> of the Convention. Contrary to the case of Oluić (c... | 11 |
137. The Government challenged the existence of a family life in the present case, relying essentially on the absence of a biological link between the applicants and the child and on the illegality of the applicants’ conduct under Italian law. They submitted that, in view of the applicants’ unlawful conduct, no tie pr... | 11 |
73. The applicant also complained that the domestic court had failed to secure the effective exercise of his right of contact during the Hague Convention proceedings. As a result, his contact with the child had been irregular and rare, as it had been at the absolute discretion of the abducting mother. That, in the app... | 11 |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.