The Court declared the application in the case of Democratic Republic of the Congo v. Belgium inadmissible.

In this case the Democratic Republic of the Congo complained about the reasoning given in judgments of the Belgian courts concerning the limitation period for the civil action it had lodged in a dispute about the liquidation of a mining company incorporated under Zairean law in which it was a shareholder.

The Court held that under the Convention only High Contracting Parties, private persons, groups of individuals or non-governmental organisations were entitled to bring a case before it. As the Democratic Republic of the Congo did not fall into any of those categories, the Convention did not allow it to bring a case before the Court.

Press release

The Court has declared inadmissible the applications in Faller v. France and Steinmetz v. France.

The applicants were first found liable by the National Medical Council’s disciplinary board in 2009, for professional misconduct in their treatment of patients under social security schemes. Later, in respect of the same facts, they were convicted and sentenced in 2014 by the Court of Appeal of Colmar.

The Court found that the 2009 decision against the applicants pursuant to the Social Security Code had not been a “conviction” for an “offence” within the meaning of Article 4 of Protocol No. 7 (right not to be tried or punished twice) and that this Article was therefore inapplicable.

Press release

In the case of Kılıçdaroğlu v. Turkey the Court held that there had been a violation of freedom of expression.

The case concerned a civil judgment ordering Kemal Kılıçdaroğlu, Chairman of the main opposition party (Cumhuriyet Halk Partisi - CHP), to pay compensation for tarnishing the reputation of the then Prime Minister, Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, on account of remarks made by him in two speeches delivered in 2012 on the parliamentary estate.

Press release 

The second SCN (Superior Court Network) webinar on the theme of Detention and health took place on 23 October 2020.

Presentations have covered detention conditions and judicial review thereof, and have focused in particular on the issues of health care in the context of the detention of vulnerable persons, the detention of migrants in ill health and the Court’s practice in respect of requests for interim measures under Rule 39 of the Rules of Court, notably in cases raising Covid-19 issues.

Superior Courts Network

The Court held a Grand Chamber hearing in the case of Denis and Irvine v. Belgium.

The case 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

Webcast of the hearing

Country profile : Belgium