Chamber judgment concerning Romania
30/11/2021
In the case of Țiriac v. Romania, the Court found no violation of the right to respect for private and family life.
The applicant, a former tennis player and former president of the Romanian Olympic Committee, who is also considered as one of the richest persons in Romania, had complained of the dismissal by the Romanian courts of his claim brought following the publication in the Financiarul newspaper of an article which he had considered defamatory. The article had concerned the business activities and practices of some of the wealthiest people in Romania and the effect of those activities on the system of public tax collection.
The Court considered that the article had been a combination of value judgments and statements of fact which were supported by a sufficient factual basis, and that it had not had any discernible negative effect on the applicant’s life since it had not been written in bad faith.
Grand Chamber
-
Forthcoming delivery
03/12/2021
The Court will be delivering a Grand Chamber ruling in the case of Abdi Ibrahim v. Norway on 10 December 2021. The case concerns the decision by the Norwegian authorities to allow the adoption of a child by a foster family against his mother’s wishes.
Webcast of the hearing (27/01/2021)
... -
Forthcoming delivery
30/11/2021
The Court will be delivering a Grand Chamber ruling in the case of Savran v. Denmark on 7 December 2021.
In this case, the applicant, a Turkish national who suffers from a psychiatric illness, was convicted in Denmark and an order was made for his expulsion. He complains that, owing to his mental health, his rights would be violated if he were to be returned to Turkey.
Webcast of the hearing (24/06/2020)
...
Chamber
-
Judgment concerning Norway
02/12/2021In the case of Jallow v. Norway the Court found that there had been no violation of the Convention.
The applicant, a Gambian national living in Gambia, had complained that he had been unable to participate in person, having failed to obtain a visa, in hearings concerning parental responsibility for his son, who was living in Norway and whose mother had died. Before the ECHR, he argued, in particular, that the proceedings had been unfair and that he had been penalised because he had been unable to be physically present.
The Court noted that the applicant had been assisted by his lawyer, who had attended all the hearings, and that even though things had at times been more technically complicated than if he had been in the same room, he had not lacked opportunities to present his case, during both the preparation of the case file and the hearing itself.
...
Delivered Judgments & Decisions
Forthcoming Judgments & Decisions
07-09/12/2021