Article 34/35 - All Updates - ECHR-KS
Article 34/35 - Individual applications and Admissibility criteria
All Updates
FU QUAN, s.r.o. v. the Czech Republic [GC], no. 24827/14
Article 35: access to court and the requirement to exhaust domestic remedies.
Judgment | Legal Summary
Grosam v. the Czech Republic [GC], no. 19750/13
Articles 34 and 35: distinction between complaints and secondary arguments and the consequent delimiting of the Court’s ability to recharacterise a complaint.
Judgment | Legal Summary
Chief Rabbinate of the Jewish Community in Izmir v. Türkiye, no. 1574/12
Article 34: locus standi of the Chief Rabbinate despite lack of legal personality.
Judgment
Szaxon v. Hungary (dec.), no. 54421/21
Article 35: new compensatory remedy for the protractedness of civil proceedings considered effective and requiring exhaustion.
Decision | Legal Summary
Mamasakhlisi and Others v. Georgia and Russia, nos. 29999/04 and 41424/04
Article 35: six months’ time-limit assessed taking into account the applicants’ vulnerability.
Judgment
Croatian Radio-Television v. Croatia, no. 52132/19 and 19 others
Article 34: locus standi of a public broadcaster.
Judgment | Legal Summary
Kreyndlin and Others v. Russia, no. 33470/18
Article 38: expiration of domestic statutory time-limit for storage of materials not constituting a reasonable explanation for the failure to comply with the Court’s request to provide documents.
Judgment
Sorbalo v. the Republic of Moldova (dec.), no. 1210/10
Article 34: annulment of a judge's dismissal and reinstatement in his post. Loss of victim status.
Decision
Ukraine and the Netherlands v. Russia (dec.) [GC], nos. 8019/16 and 2 others
Article 35: relevance of non-domestic remedies in an inter-State case for the purposes of the application of the six-month rule.
Decision | Legal Summary
Khural and Zeynalov v. Azerbaijan (no. 2), no. 383/12
Article 34: locus standi of editor-in-chief who was not party to the proceedings against newspaper.
Judgment
Hoppen and trade union of AB Amber Grid employees v. Lithuania, no. 976/20
Article 34: trade union’s victim status to complain about dismissal of its member.
Judgment | Legal Summary
Gherardi Martiri v. San Marino, no. 35511/20
Article 35: the rule of confidentiality, provocative statements within acceptable limits and degree of tolerance under Article 35 § 3 (a). Abuse of the right of petition.
Judgment | Legal Summary
Orhan v. Türkiye (dec.), no. 38358/22
Protocol No. 15: date of adoption of the final decision determines time-limit (six or four months) to lodge application before the Court.
Decision | Legal Summary
Aygün v. Belgium, no. 28336/12
Article 35: ban on burying sons abroad. Compatibility ratione materiae (Article 8 “private life" and "family").
Judgment
Gaggl v. Austria, no. 63950/19
Article 34: surviving husband, albeit the victim of the crime, with legitimate interest in the circumstances in pursuing application in late wife’s stead. Locus standi.
Judgment
Kotov and Others v. Russia, nos. 6142/18 and 13 others
Article 35: applicants not absolved from the obligation to exhaust domestic remedies by virtue of the proceedings brought by the first applicant.
Judgment | Legal Summary
Pavlov and Others v. Russia, no. 31612/09
Article 35: applicants absolved from the obligation to exhaust domestic remedies by virtue of the appeal brought by the other applicants.
Judgment | Legal Summary
Paketova and Others v. Bulgaria, nos. 17808/19 and 36972/19
Article 35: multiple applicants and exhaustion of domestic remedies by only some of them.
Judgment | Legal Summary
Kaganovskyy v. Ukraine, no. 2809/18
Respect for human rights requiring to continue the examination of the application before the Court following the applicant's death in the course of the proceedings (Article 37 § 1).
Judgment
O.M. and D.S. v. Ukraine, no. 18603/12
Article 34: state failure to comply with interim measure indicated by the Court under Rule 39 not to remove applicants: hindering the right of application.
Judgment
H.F. and Others v. France [GC], nos. 24384/19 and 44234/20
Article 34: applicants’ standing to act on behalf of their daughters and grandchildren, direct victims prevented from lodging applications with the Court. Locus standi.
Judgment | Legal Summary
Darboe and Camara v. Italy, no. 5797/17
Article 35: age-assessment procedures for migrants requesting international protection and claiming to be children. Compatibility ratione materiae (Article 8 “private life").
Judgment | Legal Summary
Katsikeros v. Greece, no. 2303/19
Article 35: issue of impartiality as concerns the composition of the Court of Cassation. Exhaustion of domestic remedies.
Judgment
Kotlyar v. Russia, nos. 38825/16 and 2 others
Article 10 inapplicable to protest in the form of deliberate submission of false information to authorities in breach of criminal law. Compatibility ratione materiae (Article 10).
Judgment | Legal Summary
Ecodefence and Others v. Russia, nos. 9988/13 and 60 others
Article 34: failure to comply with interim measure through enforcement of dissolution order against a non-governmental organisation. Hinder the exercise of the right of application.
Judgment | Legal Summary
Thibaut v. France (dec.), nos. 41892/19 and 41893/19
Article 35: exhaustion of domestic remedy by an association, not the applicant before the Court, but to which the applicants are members.
Decision
Savickis and Others v. Latvia [GC], no. 49270/11
Article 35: request for reopening of domestic proceedings on the basis of an ECHR judgment and subsequent individual complaint before the Constitutional Court. Exhaustion of domestic remedies. Six-months.
Judgment | Legal Summary
Taner Kılıç (no. 2) v. Turkey, no. 208/18
Article 35: complaint allegedly submitted to the United Nations. Matter already submitted to another international procedure.
Judgment
X and Others v. Albania, nos. 73548/17 and 45521/19
Article 35: domestic remedy used by an independent administrative authority - and not the applicant - in a discrimination case.
Judgment | Legal Summary
Fine Doo and Canoski and Others v. North Macedonia (dec.), no. 37948/13
Article 35: exception to the general principles on the rule of exhaustion of domestic remedies.
Decision
Mierla and Others v. Romania (dec.), nos. 25801/17 and 2 others
Article 35: delayed drafting of reasoning of court judgments. Compatibility ratione materiae (Article 6).
Decision
Dubois v. France, no. 52833/19
Article 35: persons interviewed voluntarily by the police. Compatibility ratione materiae (Article 6 criminal).
Judgment
N.B. and Others v. France, no. 49775/20
Article 34: failure over a seven-day period to implement the interim measure aimed at ending the detention pending removal of a child. Hinder the exercise of the right of application.
Judgment | Legal Summary
Toledo Polo v. Spain (dec.), no. 39691/18
Article 35: death of Spanish soldier, killed during UN peace-keeping mission by Israeli artillery in Lebanon. Compatibility ratione personae; ratione loci.
Decision | Legal Summary
Communauté genevoise d'action syndicale (CGAS) v. Switzerland, no. 21881/20 (pending before the GC)
Article 35: urgent anti-COVID measures prohibiting public events for a lengthy period. Exhaustion of domestic remedies.
Judgment | Legal Summary
Grzęda v. Poland [GC], no. 43572/18
Article 35: applicability of Article 6 (civil) to the premature ending of mandate for a judge, member of the National Council of the Judiciary. The first and second conditions of the Eskelinen test. Compatibility ratione materiae.
Judgment | Legal Summary
Povilonis v. Lithuania (dec.), no. 81624/17
Article 35: applicant's contradictory versions of the facts at domestic level and before the Court. Abuse of the right of petition.
Decision
Y.Y. and Y.Y. v. Russia, no. 43229/18
Article 34: non-enforcement of residence order of child in favour of mother acknowledged and compensated domestically. Victim status retained.
Judgment
Aspiotis v. Greece (dec.), no. 4561/17
Article 35: appeal to a higher prosecutor. Exhaustion of domestic remedies.
Decision
Mateuț v. Romania (dec.), no. 35959/15
Article 34: victim status of a lawyer in relation to surveillance measure with his client. Compatibility ratione personae.
Decision
Saakashvili v. Georgia (dec.), nos. 6232/20 and 22394/20
Article 35: three-month extension of six-month time-limit during critical period of Covid-19 global pandemic. Six-months.
Decision | Legal Summary
Sebeleva and Others v. Russia, no. 42416/18
Article 35: the “no significant disadvantage” admissibility criterion in relation to shareholders.
Judgment | Legal Summary
Wikimedia Foundation, Inc. v. Turkey (dec.), no. 25479/19
Article 34: blocking order against a website and appropriate redress. Exhaustion of domestic remedies and loss of victim status (Article 10).
Decision
Mastilović and Others v. Montenegro, no. 28754/10
Article 34: court’s inability to establish the identity of some applicants with certainty. Compatibility ratione personae.
Judgment
Shirkhanyan v. Armenia, no. 54547/16
Article 34: detainee not allowed to have private meetings with his representatives before the Court for a prolonged period of time. Alleged technical issue concerning Rule 39. Hinder the exercise of the right of application.
Judgment
Tunç v. Turkey (dec.), no. 45801/19
Article 35: application allegedly "substantially the same" under Article 35 § 2 (b) as one before the United Nations.
Decision
Advance Pharma sp. z o.o v. Poland, no. 1469/20
Article 35: exhaustion of domestic remedies assessed in light of ECHR's rejection of Constitutional Court’s interpretation of Article 6 and of its general operational context.
Judgment | Legal Summary
Šeks v. Croatia, no. 39325/20
Article 35: the “no significant disadvantage” admissibility criterion and access to documents classified under domestic law (Article 10).
Judgment | Legal Summary
Manannikov v. Russia, no. 9157/08
Article 35: 14 EUR fine on counter-demonstrator for displaying provocative banner during a public event. The “no significant disadvantage” admissibility criterion.
Judgment | Legal Summary
Sy v. Italy, no. 11791/20
Article 34: 35-day delay in enforcing the Court’s interim measure (Rule 39) requesting the placement of a bipolar patient in a specialist centre.
Judgment | Legal Summary