SARGSYAN v. AZERBAIJAN (application no. 40167/06, judgment of 16 June 2015): the intersection between European human rights law and international humanitarian law, the right to humanitarian intervention, jurisdiction over the ceasefire line and the adjacent area, responsibility to protect, duty to protect civilians.

CHIRAGOV AND OTHERS v. ARMENIA (application no. 13216/05, judgment of 16 June 2015): the intersection between European human rights law and international humanitarian law, State secession, “remedial secession” as a human rights imperative, jurisdiction in foreign territory by long-distance remote-controlled exercise of authority, occupation, violation of property rights of displaced persons.

HERRMANN v. GERMANY (application no. 9300/07, judgment of 26 June 2012): conscientious objection to hunting, the State obligation to protect animal “rights”, lawful restrictions of property rights conflicting with the proprietor’s conscience; the stare decisis effect of the Court’s judgment, European consensus as a factor of the Court’s case law development; direct discrimination between owners of big and small plots of land with regard to the legal obligation to tolerate hunting by third persons in their land.

MORENO DIAZ PENA AND OTHERS v. PORTUGAL (application no. 44262/10, judgment of 4 June 2012): ECHR as a fourth instance, interpretation of contract.

PIOTRAS BOGDEL v. LITHUANIA (application no. 41248/06, judgment of 26 November 2013): disproportionate annulment of erroneous administrative contract with bona fide private party, limitation period for claiming invalidity of a contract in action brought by the administration distinct from limitation period in action brought by the private party.

FILKIN v. PORTUGAL (application no. 69729/12, judgment of 3 March 2020): presumption of guilt against person suspected of money laundering with his assets frozen for more than three years without being accused.

ALBERT AND OTHERS v. HUNGARY (application no. 5294/14, judgment of 29 January 2019): State control over banks, interference with the substance of the shareholders’ rights.

KÖNYV-TÁR KFT AND OTHERS v. HUNGARY (application no. 21623/13, judgment of 16 October 2018): de facto State monopoly in the schoolbook distribution market, loss of clientele as deprivation of a possession.

S.C. SERVICE BENZ COM S.R.L. v. ROMANIA (application no. 58045/11, judgment of 4 July 2017): vicarious liability, confiscation of property belonging to persons other than the offender