European Court of Human Rights

The applicant was an associate, employee and then managing director of a company which, having no liquid assets, became insolvent. It was struck off the court register of companies in , but that decision could not be served on the company, since it no longer had an office at its registered address; or elsewhere. As a result of a widespread issue with the Court's fax provider please use the following temporary fax numbers until further notice:. Italy the Court found a violation of the right of access to a court and the right to protection of property.

The applicant company owns a building in Rome of around 8, sq. In the case of M. Lithuania the Court found several violations of the Convention. The case concerned a Russian family of seven who, after leaving Chechnya, tried on three separate occasions to seek asylum in Lithuania, but were each time refused the right to make an application at the border. Slovakia the Court found a violation of the prohibition of the discrimination and the violation of the right to life. The two applicants in the case, a married couple, were seriously injured and three members of their Roma family were killed in a shooting spree at their home by an off-duty police officer.

The ruling was adopted in the form of a simplified judgment which contained no legal reasoning. Greece on 19 December Country profile - Greece. The Court will be delivering its Grand Chamber judgment in the case of Murtazaliyeva v.

• European court of human rights.
• The Darkest Part: A Living Heartwood Novel;
• European Court of Human Rights | www.newyorkethnicfood.com.
• ScriptureX.1?
• Grand Chamber judgment concerning Slovenia?

Russia on 18 December In this case the applicant, a Russian national of Chechen origin, complains of the unfairness of criminal proceedings brought against her for preparing a terrorist attack. Country profile - Russia. The Court has today adopted a plan for its future processing of thousands of applications from individuals who have raised complaints against Ukraine or the Russian Federation or both countries in relation to the conflict in Eastern Ukraine.

The European Court of Human Rights has decided that a Ukrainian lawyer, Nataliya Yevgenivna Tselovalnichenko, should be permanently prohibited from representing or otherwise assisting applicants in both pending and future applications.

Press release in Ukrainian. Dzhioyeva and Others v. Georgia, Kudukhova and Kudukhova v. Georgia, and Naniyeva and Bagayev v. Belli et Arquier-Martinez v. Composition of the Court. Judges of the Court. Speeches by the President. How the Court works. Case processing and working methods. Events at the Court.

European Court of Human Rights

Judges enjoy, during their term as judges, the privileges and immunities provided for in Article 40 of the Statute of the Council of Europe. The plenary court is an assembly of all of the Court's judges. It has no judicial functions. It elects the court's president, vice-president, registrar and deputy registrar. It also deals with administrative matters, discipline, working methods, reforms, the establishment of Chambers and the adoption of the Rules of Court. The jurisdiction of the court is generally divided into inter-state cases, applications by individuals against contracting states, and advisory opinions in accordance with Protocol No.

Applications by individuals constitute the majority of cases heard by the Court. Applications by individuals against contracting states, alleging that the state violates their rights under the European Convention on Human Rights , can be made by any person, non-governmental organisation or group of individuals.

Although the official languages of the Court are English and French, applications may be submitted in any one of the official languages of the contracting states.

European Court of Human Rights - Wikipedia

An application has to be made in writing and signed by the applicant or by the applicant's representative. Once registered with the Court, the case is assigned to a judge rapporteur, who can make a final decision that the case is inadmissible. A case may be inadmissible when it is incompatible with the requirements of ratione materiae , ratione temporis or ratione personae , or if the case cannot be proceeded with on formal grounds, such as non-exhaustion of domestic remedies, lapse of the six months from the last internal decision complained of, anonymity, substantial identity with a matter already submitted to the Court, or with another procedure of international investigation.

If the rapporteur judge decides that the case can proceed, the case is referred to a Chamber of the Court which, unless it decides that the application is inadmissible, communicates the case to the government of the state against which the application is made, asking the government to present its observations on the case.

The Chamber of the Court then deliberates and judges the case on its admissibility and its merits. Cases that raise serious questions of interpretation and application of the European Convention on Human Rights , a serious issue of general importance, or which may depart from previous case law can be heard in the Grand Chamber if all parties to the case agree to the Chamber of the Court relinquishing jurisdiction to the Grand Chamber.

A panel of five judges decides whether the Grand Chamber accepts the referral. Any contracting state to the European Convention on Human Rights can sue another contracting state in the Court for alleged breaches of the Convention, although in practice this is very rare. The Committee of Ministers may, by majority vote, ask the Court to deliver an advisory opinion on the interpretation of the European Convention on Human Rights , unless the matter relates to the content and scope of fundamental rights which the Court already considers.

After the preliminary finding of admissibility the Court examines the case by hearing representations from both parties. The Court may undertake any investigation it deems necessary on the facts or issues raised in the application and contracting states are required to provide the Court with all necessary assistance for this purpose. The European Convention on Human Rights requires all hearings to be in public, unless there are exceptional circumstances justifying the holding of a private hearing. In practice the majority of cases are heard in private following written pleadings.

In confidential proceedings the Court may assist both parties in securing a settlement, in which case the Court monitors the compliance of the agreement with the Convention. However, in many cases, a hearing is not held. The judgment of the Grand Chamber is final. Judgments by the Chamber of the Court becomes final three months after they are issued, unless a reference to the Grand Chamber for review or appeal has been made. If the panel of the Grand Chamber rejects the request for referral, the judgment of the Chamber of the Court becomes final.

After the public hearing, the judges deliberate. The Court's chamber decides both issues regarding admissibility and merits of the case. Generally, both these issues are dealt with in the same judgment. The Court's judgments are public and must contain reasons justifying the decision. Article 46 of the Convention provides that contracting states undertake to abide by the Court's final decision. On the other hand, advisory opinions are, by definition, non-binding. The Court has to date decided consistently that under the Convention it has no jurisdiction to annul domestic laws or administrative practices which violate the Convention.

The Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe is charged with supervising the execution of the Court's judgments. The Committee of Ministers oversees the contracting states' changes to their national law in order that it is compatible with the Convention, or individual measures taken by the contracting state to redress violations.

Judgments by the Court are binding on the respondent states concerned and states usually comply with the Court's judgments. Chambers decide cases by a majority. Any judge who has heard the case can attach to the judgment a separate opinion. This opinion can concur or dissent with the decision of the Court.

In case of a tie in voting, the President has the casting vote. However, since all EU states are members of the Council of Europe and have signed the Convention on Human Rights, there are concerns about consistency in case law between the two courts. Even though its member states are party to the Convention, the European Union itself is not a party, as it did not have competence to do so under previous treaties. This would mean that the Court of Justice is bound by the judicial precedents of the Court of Human Rights's case law and thus be subject to its human rights law, avoiding issues of conflicting case law between these two courts.

Most of the Contracting Parties to the European Convention on Human Rights have incorporated the Convention into their own national legal systems, either through constitutional provision, statute or judicial decision. The court's interpretation of the Convention's reach is at times subject to criticism as either too narrow or too wide. For instance, the former judge in respect of Cyprus, Loukis Loucaides, criticised the Court for a "reluctance to find violations in sensitive matters affecting the interests of the respondent States".

It considers itself the equivalent of the Supreme Court of the United States , laying down a federal law of Europe". Lord Hoffman considered that the ability of the court to interfere in the detail of domestic law ought to be curtailed. Bossuyt especially criticized the Court's handling of asylum cases with respect to articles 3 and 6 of the Treaty.

Fax Issue - New Temporary Fax Numbers

Criticism from Russia, a country held to be in violation of the Convention by the Court in many decisions, is frequent. The Court's judge in respect of Russia, Anatoly Kovler , explaining his frequent dissenting opinions , noted that "I dislike when the Court evaluates non-European values as reactionary Refah v. Russia case, stated that Russia has the right to create a mechanism of protection from Court decisions "touching the national sovereignty, the basic constitutional principles".

There has also been criticism of the Court's structure. Loucaides wrote that by introducing in its Rules a Bureau, the Court created "a separate collective organ that had nothing to do with the structure of the Court organs according to the Convention". Furthermore, as the ECtHR grows, the consensus between the members diminishes. The design is meant to reflect, amongst other things, the two distinct components of the Commission and Court as it was then. In the Court received the Freedom medal. From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

1. The European Court of Human Rights Database?
2. The Protector: The Dream Reborn?
3. Vestiges du Dieu (essai français) (French Edition).
4. Namibian Soundscapes: Music of the People and the Land.
5. ADDITIONAL MEDIA.
6. Enemigos íntimos (Julia) (Spanish Edition).
7. European Court of Human Rights - ECHR, CEDH, news, information, press releases?

Signatories to the European Convention on Human Rights. Michele Nicoletti European Congress President: European Court of Human Rights President: List of judges of the European Court of Human Rights. This section needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed.