Case summaries

  • My search
  • Relevant International and European Legislation
    1
Reset
ECtHR - Sultani v France, Application No. 45223/05
Country of applicant: Afghanistan

No violation of Articles 3 of the Convention and Article 4 of Protocol 4 should the Applicant be removed to Afghanistan. This assessment was made in light of the personal circumstances of the Applicant and the overall context in Afghanistan.

Date of decision: 26-09-2007
Relevant International and European Legislation: 1951 Refugee Convention,Article 3,Art 4
ECtHR - Shamayev and Others v Georgia and Russia, Application no.36378/02, 12 October 2005
Country of applicant: Georgia, Russia, Russia (Chechnya)

Thirteen applicants from Georgia and Russia (of Chechen origin) alleged that their extradition to Russia, where capital punishment was not abolished, exposed them to the risk of death, torture or ill-treatment contrary to Articles 2 and 3 of the Convention. The applicants also alleged that they had been subject to violence and ill-treatment by fifteen members of the Georgian Ministry of Justice’s special forces in Tbilisi Prison no.5., on the night of 3 and 4 October 2002. Their legal representatives asserted that Mr Aziev, one of the extradited applicants, had died as a result of ill-treatment inflicted on him. The applicants also complained of violations of Article 2 and 3, Article 5 §§ 1, 2 and 4, Article 13 in conjunction with articles 2 and 3, Article 34, Articles 2, 3 and 6 §§ 1,2 and 3 and Article 38 § 1 of the Convention. 

Date of decision: 12-04-2005
Relevant International and European Legislation: Council of Europe Instruments,EN - Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms,Article 2,Article 3,Article 5,Article 6,Article 13,Article 32,Article 34,Article 35,Article 38,Article 41,ECHR (Fourth Protocol),Art 4
ECtHR - Čonka v Belgium, Application no. 51564/99, 5 February 2002
Country of applicant: Slovakia

The applicants were unlawfully detained and had no effective remedy to challenge their detention. There was a finding that they had been collectively expelled, given the context of their expulsion along with many others of the same nationality, and as their individual circumstances had not been adequately taken into consideration. 

Date of decision: 05-02-2002
Relevant International and European Legislation: 1951 Refugee Convention,EN - Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms,Article 5,Article 13,Art 5.1,Art 5.2,Art 5.4,ECHR (Fourth Protocol),Art 4
ECtHR - Vedran Andric v. Sweden, Application no. 45917/99, 23 February 1999, decision as to the inadmissibility
Country of applicant: Bosnia and Herzegovina, Croatia

The application of a Bosnian Croat concerning the collective expulsions from Croatia to Bosnia-Hercegovina is found to be manifestly ill-founded and thus the application is inadmissible. 

Date of decision: 23-02-1999
Relevant International and European Legislation: Council of Europe Instruments,EN - Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms,Article 3,Article 34,Article 35,ECHR (Fourth Protocol),Art 4
ECtHR - Abdulaziz, Cabales and Balkandali v The United Kingdom, Application nos. 9214/80; 9473/81 and 9474/81, 28 May 1985
Country of applicant: Malawi, Philippines, United Kingdom

The ECtHR held that the 1980 UK Immigration Rules breached ECHR Article 14 taken together with Article 8 as they discriminated on the ground of sex against three female applicants settled in the UK who wished to be joined by their spouses. It was easier for men settled in the UK to be joined by a non-national spouse than women but no objective and reasonable justification was found for this difference of treatment.

Date of decision: 28-05-1985
Relevant International and European Legislation: Article 3,Article 8,Article 12,Article 13,Article 14,Article 25,Article 31,Article 32,Article 43,Article 44,Article 46,Article 47,Article 48,Article 50,ECHR (Fourth Protocol)