GUÐMUNDUR ANDRI ÁSTRÁÐSSON v. ICELAND (application no. 26374/18, judgment of 1 December 2020): violation of the right to a court established by law, circumvention of the law on judicial appointments, absolute defects in criminal procedure, effects of the Court’s judgment.
MURTAZALIYEVA v. RUSSIA (application no. 36658/05, judgment of 18 December 2018): conviction for terrorism based on absent witnesses, right to obtain the attendance and examination of witnesses on behalf of the defendant under the same conditions as witnesses against him or her, principle of immediacy, overall fairness test.
RAMOS NUNES DE CARVALHO E SÁ v. PORTUGAL (applications nos. 55391/13, 57728/13 and 74041/13, judgment of 6 November 2018): lack of procedural guarantees before the High Judicial Council, lack of independence and impartiality of the Judicial Division of the Supreme Court, insufficient extent of the review conducted by the Judicial Division of the Supreme Court and lack of a public hearing.
CORREIA DE MATOS v. PORTUGAL (application no. 56402/12, judgment of 4 April 2018): conviction of lawyer for defamation of a judge, the lawyer’s right to defend himself or herself in person in criminal procedure, distortion of European consensus and fragmentation of international law.
KÁROLY NAGY v. HUNGARY (application no. 56665/09, judgment of 14 September 2017): dismission of a pastor of the Hungarian Reformed Church, right of access to court concerning the compensation claim.
MOREIRA FERREIRA C. PORTUGAL (N° 2) (application no. 19867/12, judgment of 11 July 2017): refusal to reopen criminal proceedings following a judgement delivered by the European Court of Human Rights which found a violation of article 6, principle of subsidiarity and national margin of appreciation.
LUPENI GREEK CATHOLIC PARISH AND OTHERS v. ROMANIA (application no. 76943/11, judgment of 29 November 2016): forced transfer of property from the Greek Catholic Church to the Orthodox Church, redistribution of property, duty of neutrality of the State, uncertainty in the case law and lack of legal certainty, discrimination of religious minority.
BAKA v. HUNGARY (application no. 20261/12, judgment of 23 June 2016): dismissal of the president of the Supreme Court by a transitional constitutional provision, ad hominem legislation against the independence of the judiciary, lack of access to Constitutional Court to impugn transitional constitutional norms, transitional constitutional provision incompatible with the European Convention on Human Rights, unconstitutional constitutional norms (verfassungswidrige Verfassungsnormen), direct, supra-constitutional effect of the European Convention.
AL-DULIMI and MONTANA MANAGEMENT INC. v. SWITZERLAND (application no. 5809/08, judgment of 21 June 2016): Security Council Resolutionbased confiscation measures as penalties, the fundamental character of the right of access to court in criminal and civil matters, the conflict between obligations derived from the United Nations Charter and obligations derived from the European Convention on Human Rights, the European Convention as the European Constitution, the Court’s Bosphorus case law applied to the United Nations.
DVORSKI v. CROATIA (application no. 25703/11, judgment of 20 October 2015): erroneous deprivation of choice of lawyer, the right to a lawyer of one’s own choosing from the initial stages of the proceedings, impact of structural errors on the fairness of criminal proceedings
MIKHAYLOVA v. RUSSIA (application no. 46998/08, judgment of 19 November 2015): lack of free legal assistance to a defendant in a criminal or administrative offence.
MELO TADEU v. PORTUGAL (application no. 27785/10, judgment of 23 October 2014): presumption of innocence in tax enforcement proceedings after acquittal in criminal proceedings based on the same facts.
LAGUTIN AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA (application nos. 6228/09, 19123/09, 19678/07, 52340/08 and 7451/09, judgment of 24 April 2014): undercover operations, human rights legislation on special investigation techniques.
MATYTSINA v. RUSSIA (application no. 58428/10, judgment of 27 March 2014): lack of cross-examination of the alleged victim; deficient application of a blanket criminal provision, waiver of the statute of limitations in criminal law.
DILIPAK v. TURKEY (application no. 29680/05, judgment of 15 September 2015): defamation of State and state organs, Majestätsbeleidigung.
GRANDE STEVENS AND OTHERS v. ITALY (applications nos. 18640/10, 18647/10, 18663/10, 18668/10 and 18698/10, judgment of 4 March 2014): unfair administrative proceedings for market manipulation before the Commissione Nazionale per la Società e la Borsa (CONSOB), lack of an effective judicial review of the CONSOB’s decision, the court of appeal’s amendment of the accusation, to the detriment of the appellant, illegality and disproportionality of the pecuniary and non-pecuniary sanctions, ne bis in idem effect of conviction of an administrative offence in subsequent criminal proceedings.
ATES MIMARLIK MUHENDISLIK A.S. v. TURKEY (application no. 33275/05, judgment of 25 September 2012): jurisdiction over claim of payment of work fee regarding an international construction contract.
K.M.C. v. HUNGARY (application no. 19554/11, judgment of 10 July 2012): groundless decision of termination of employment.
MENARINI DIAGNOSTICS S.R.L. v. ITALY (application no. 43509/08, judgment of September 2011): scope of judicial review of administrative sanctions.
ADAMOV v. SWITZERLAND (application no. 3052/06, judgment of 21 June 2011): salvus conductus guarantee, conduct of State agents with bad faith.
DOBRIC v. SERBIA (applications nos. 2611/07 and 15276/07, judgment of 21 June 2011): rejection by the Supreme Court of an appeal in civil procedure due to redenomination of the Serbian currency and change of the value of the dispute.
ABDULLAH YILDIZ v. TURKEY (application no. 35164/05, judgment of 26 April 2011): compensation for non-pecuniary damage caused by violation of article 6.
BELUGIN v. RUSSIA (application no. 2991/06, judgment 26 November 2019): compensation for non-pecuniary damage caused by violation of article 6.
RAZVOZZHAYEV v. RUSSIA AND UKRAINE and UDALTSOV v. RUSSIA (applications nos. 75734/12 and 2 others, judgment of 19 November 2019): abduction of asylum seeker from Ukraine to Russia; excessively intensive court hearing schedule and lengthy prison transfers; dissent regarding inadmissibility decision.
URAZBAYEV v. RUSSIA (application no 13128/06, judgment of 8 October 2019): compensation for non-pecuniary damage caused by violation of article 6.
FARRUGIA v. MALTA (application no. 63041/13, judgment of 4 June 2019): overall fairness test, access to lawyer during police custody.
GARBUZ v. UKRAINE (application no. 72681/10, judgment of 19 February 2019): separate opinions on decisions regarding inadmissibility which are incorporated into merits judgments, attesting witnesses.
PRODUKCIJA PLUS STORITVENO PODJETJE D.O.O. v. SLOVENIA (application no. 47072/15, judgment of 23 October 2018): reopening of domestic proceedings after finding of Article 6 violation; compensation for pecuniary damages, loss of real opportunities.
SOMORJAI v. HUNGARY (application no. 60934/13, 28 August 2018): lack of reasoning in connection with the need for a reference to the CJEU for a preliminary ruling; dissent regarding inadmissibility decision.
DEVINAR v. SLOVENIA (application no. 28621/15, 22 May 2018): objective impartiality of the disability experts’ commission, distinguishing technique, silent overruling of previous case law.
SVETINA v. SLOVENIA (application no. 38059/13, 22 May 2018): conviction based on “inevitable discovery” exception to the doctrine of the fruit of the poisonous tree.
DRAGOŞ IOAN RUSU v. ROMANIA (application no. 22767/08, judgment of 31 October 2017): conviction based on evidence collected in breach of Article 8 of the Convention.
BORG v. MALTA (application no. 37537/13, judgment of 12 January 2016): breach of the Court’s Salduz case law by the Constitutional Court of Malta, lack of impartiality of magistrate, lack of legal assistance to third persons called as witnesses against the applicant.