This site uses cookies. Read our policy. ×

Grand Chamber judgment concerning Hungary


In the case of Albert and Others v. Hungary the Court declared the application inadmissible in respect of 233 of the applicants and struck the case out of its list in respect of four others who no longer wished to maintain their application.

The case concerned a Hungarian law of 2013 imposing the integration of two banks, Kinizsi Bank Zrt. and Mohácsi Takarék Bank Zrt, into a central supervisory scheme.

The 237 applicants, who had been shareholders in two savings banks, complained about the impact of that law on their right to influence the management and policy of those banks.

Press release Delivery of the judgment

Webcast of the hearing (18/12/2019)

Country profile - Hungary

Interim Measures

  • Request for Interim measure rejected

    Request for Interim measure rejected

    The Court has decided not to apply an interim measure requested in the case Gyulumyan and Others v. Armenia concerning recent amendments to the Constitution of Armenia.

    Press release

  • Rule 39 - No duty team available


    Exceptionally, the Court will be closed on 13 and 14 July 2020, and no duty team will be available to deal with requests for interim measures (Rule 39 of the Rules of Court).


Official Visits

  • Visit by the First President of the Supreme Court of Poland

    Visit by the First President of the Supreme Court of Poland

    On 9 July 2020, Małgorzata Manowska, First President of the Supreme Court of Poland, visited the Court and was received by President Robert Spano. Krzysztof Wojtyczek, the judge elected in respect of Poland, and Marialena Tsirli, Deputy Registrar, also attended the meeting.

  • Visit by the Défenseur des droits, France

    Visit by the Défenseur des droits, France

    On 6 July 2020, President Robert Spano met Jacques Toubon, French Défenseur des droits. Mattias Guyomar, judge elected in respect of France, and Roderick Liddell, Registrar, also attended the meeting.



  • Webcasting: contribution from Ireland

    Webcasting: contribution from Ireland

    Ireland has recently renewed its support for the webcasting project, which enables all the public hearings of the Court to be filmed, recorded and broadcast on the ECHR Internet site.

    Thanks to the funding received since 2007 from the Irish Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade, more than 270 hearings have been filmed to date and have reached a wide audience via the Internet. The videos are made available on the day of the hearing and even the older videos can still be watched.

    Webcast of hearings


Web Publication

  • Overview of the Court’s case-law

    Overview of the Court’s case-law

    The Court has published an Overview of its case-law for the first six months of 2020, which contains a selection of cases of interest from a legal perspective.

    Overview of the Court's case-law (January-June 2020)

    More info



  • Judgment concerning Switzerland


    In the case of K.A. v. Switzerland, the Court found that there had been no violation of the Convention.

    The applicant is a Kosovar national who was deported from Switzerland, where his wife and son, who are both ill, are still living, following his criminal conviction for a drugs offence. He complained about the denial of his request for an extension of his residence permit and the order temporarily banning him from returning to Switzerland.

    The Court found that, despite the strength of the applicant’s personal ties with Switzerland, the Swiss authorities could legitimately consider, in view of his conduct and the seriousness of his offences, that it was necessary, for the purposes of preventing disorder and crime, not to extend his residence permit and to prohibit him from entering Switzerland for a limited duration of 7 years.

    Press release


Grand Chamber

  • Forthcoming judgment

    Forthcoming judgment

    The Court will be delivering its Grand Chamber judgment in the case of Mugemangango v. Belgium on 10 July 2020.

    The case concerns a post-election dispute following the elections held on 25 May 2014.

    The applicant complains about the procedure conducted by the Walloon Parliament after he had challenged the election results. He argues that the Walloon Parliament, as the only body with the power to decide on his complaint, acted as both judge and party in examining it.

    Press release 

    Webcast of the hearing (04/12/2019)

    Country profile - Belgium


Delivered Judgments & Decisions


Y.T. v. Bulgaria


17 Judgments

Forthcoming Judgments & Decisions