Case Law

The Case Law database provides access to the case-law of the European Court of Human Rights (Grand Chamber, Chamber and Committee judgments, decisions, communicated cases, advisory opinions and legal summaries from the Case-Law Information Note), the European Commission of Human Rights (decisions and reports), the Committee of Ministers (resolutions), and the Court of Justice of the European Union.


CASE DATE:
Thursday, 15 Oct 2015
STATE:
Russia and Ukraine
OUTCOME:
Preliminary objections dismissed (Article 35-1 - Exhaustion of domestic remedies, Six month period) Violation of Article 5 - Right to liberty and security (Article 5-1 - Liberty of person, Security of person, Article 5-1-f - Extradition) (Ukraine) Violation of Article 8 - Right to respect for private and family life (Article 8-1 - Respect for home) Violation of Article 5 - Right to liberty and security (Article 5-3 - Length of pre-trial detention, Reasonableness of pre-trial detention) (Russia) Violation of Article 5 - Right to liberty and security (Article 5-4 - Procedural guarantees of review, Review by a court, Speediness of review) Non-pecuniary damage - award (Article 41 - Non-pecuniary damage, Just satisfaction)
  • SUBJECT MATTER:

    (Art. 1) Obligation to respect human rights (Art. 1) Jurisdiction of states (Art. 5) Right to liberty and security (Art. 5-1) Liberty of person (Art. 5-1) Security of person (Art. 5-1-F) Extradition (Art. 5-3) Length of pre-trial detention (Art. 5-3) Reasonableness of pre-trial detention (Art. 5-4) Procedural guarantees of review (Art. 5-4) Review by a court (Art. 5-4) Speediness of review (Art. 8) Right to respect for private and family life (Art. 8-1) Respect for home (Art. 8-2) Prescribed by law (Art. 35) Admissibility criteria (Art. 35-1) Exhaustion of domestic remedies (Art. 35-1) Six month period (Art. 41) Just satisfaction-{general} (Art. 41) Just satisfaction (Art. 41) Non-pecuniary damage


    DETAIL:

    Relying on Article 5 of the Convention, the applicant complained about the actions of the Ukrainian authorities on 3 and 4 November 2000. He argued that his arrest in Feodosiya, subsequent detention and forced transfer to Moscow had been unlawful and arbitrary.


    COURT:
    ECHR
    ARTICLE:
    1, 5, 5-1, 5-1-f, 5-3, 5-4, 8, 8-1, 8-2, 35, 35-1, 41

JUSTICIA European Rights Network