This site uses cookies. Read our policy. ×

Grand Chamber judgment concerning Romania

15/10/2020

In the case of Muhammad and Muhammad v. Romania the Court held that there had been a violation concerning the procedural safeguards relating to expulsion of aliens.

The case concerned a procedure to remove two Pakistani nationals from Romania after they had been declared undesirable. 

Press release

Delivery of the judgment

Factsheet: Terrorism

Webcast of the hearing (25/09/2019)

Fiche pays - Roumanie

Chamber

  • Chamber judgment concerning Romania

    13/10/2020 
    Chamber judgment concerning Romania

    In the case of Gafiuc v. Romania, the Court found that there had been no violation of the right to freedom of expression. The applicant, a sports journalist for the Gazeta Sporturilor at the time, complained of the withdrawal of his accreditation to consult the Securitate archives after he had published information on various well-known sports figures.

    The Court noted that the applicant’s obligation to protect personal data held by public authorities had been foreseeable, and that the withdrawal of accreditation in the event of failure to comply with the strictly scientific use of information was laid down in the rules of the National Council for the Study of Securitate Archives.

    It reiterated that freedom of expression was not unlimited and can be restricted in order to protect the rights and freedoms of others.

    Press release 

    Factsheet: Protection of personal data

    ...
  • Judgment concerning Romania

    13/10/2020 

    In the case of Ádám and Others v. Romania, the Court found that there had been no violation of Article 1 of Protocol No. 12 (general prohibition of discrimination).

    The applicants are ethnic Hungarians and at school were taught in Hungarian. They complained that in the baccalaureate, as both Hungarian and Romanian languages were tested, they had been obliged to sit two additional exams compared to ethnic Romanians.

    Press release

    Factsheet: Children's Rights

     

     

    ...
  • Judgment concerning Bulgaria

    13/10/2020 

    In the case of Koychev v. Bulgaria, the Court found a violation of the right to respect for the applicant’s private life.

    The applicant claimed to be the biological father of a child born outside marriage who had been recognised by another man, the mother’s new husband. He complained to the Court that Bulgarian law did not allow a child’s biological father to challenge a decision recognising another man as the child’s father and to have the child recognised as his own.

    Press release

    Factsheet: Parental Rights

    ...
  • Judgment concerning Bulgaria

    13/10/2020 

    In the case of Marin Yosifov v. Bulgaria the Court found two violations of the right to liberty and security and a violation of the right to respect for the applicant’s private life.

    In the context of a criminal investigation into corruption in 2009, the applicant, who at the time was Mayor of Sadovo, was held in custody for four days without being brought before a judge, and a search was carried out at his office without a judicial warrant.

    Press release

    ...

Hearings

  • Grand Chamber hearing concerning the Republic of Moldova

    14/10/2020 
    Grand Chamber hearing concerning the Republic of Moldova

    The Court held a Grand Chamber hearing in the case of In the case of NIT S.R.L. v. the Republic of Moldova.

    The applicant, a private television station, alleges that its broadcasting licence was withdrawn on account of the sharp criticisms of the Moldovan Government expressed in its programmes.

    Press release

    Webcast of the hearing

    Country profile - Republic of Moldova

    ...
  • Hearings in October

    01/10/2020 
    Hearings in October

    In October 2020 the Court will be holding two hearings via videoconference, on account of the Covid-19 crisis.

    In the case of NIT S.R.L. v. the Republic of Moldova, the applicant, a private television station, alleges that its broadcasting licence was withdrawn on account of the sharp criticisms of the Moldovan Government expressed in its programmes.

    The case of Denis and Irvine v. Belgium concerns the refusal of the Belgian courts to release the applicants, who were placed in compulsory confinement in Belgium under the 1930 Social Protection Act for offences classified as theft (Mr Denis in 2007) and attempted aggravated burglary (Mr Irvine in 2002).

    Press release

    Calendar of hearings

    ...

Official Visits

  • Visit by the UNHCR Representative

    13/10/2020 
    Visit by the UNHCR Representative

    On 13 October 2020, Andreas Wissner, United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees Representative to the European Institutions in Strasbourg, visited the Court and was received by President Robert Spano. Marialena Tsirli, Registrar-elect, also attended the meeting.

    ...
  • Visit by the Permanent Representative of the United Kingdom

    13/10/2020 

    On 13 October 2020, Neil Holland, Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary, Permanent Representative of the United Kingdom to the Council of Europe, visited the Court and was received by President Robert Spano. Tim Eicke, judge elected in respect of the United Kingdom, and Roderick Liddell, Registrar, also attended the meeting.

    ...

Grand Chamber

  • Referral to the Grand Chamber

    13/10/2020 
    Referral to the Grand Chamber

    The Court has accepted the referral to the Grand Chamber of the case of Mraović v. Croatia.

    In this case, the applicant argues that the Croatian courts explained their decision to hold the trial in private by the need to protect the victim’s private life, without weighing up this right against his right to a public hearing.

    Press release

    Cases pending before the Grand Chamber

    ...

Interim Measures

  • Interim measure in the case of Armenia v. Turkey

    14/10/2020 
    Interim measure in the case of Armenia v. Turkey

    In response to a request from Armenia concerning the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict, the Court decided on 6 October 2020 to apply Rule 39 of the Rules of Court. It called on all States directly or indirectly involved in the conflict, including Turkey, to refrain from actions that would contribute to breaches of the Convention rights of civilians and to respect their obligations under the Convention.

    Having examined the objections made by the Government of Turkey and again taking account of the serious and escalating nature of the conflict, the Court does not find any reason to amend its decision or to lift any part of the interim measure previously indicated.

    Press release

    Questions and Answers on Inter-State applications

    Factsheet: Interim measures

    Inter-State Applications

    ...
Container01

Delivered Judgments & Decisions

Forthcoming Judgments & Decisions