Strasbourg Observers

View posts from: Grand Chamber

  • Rianne Herregodts

Grosam v. the Czech Republic: being the master of characterisation, not the master of transformation

August 01, 2023

By Rianne Herregodts In Grosam v. the Czech Republic, the Grand Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights concludes the Chamber of the First Section of the Court has gone too far in its characterisation of the complaint of Mr. Grosam. The judgment clarifies what it means to be ‘the master of characterisation’. It […]

  • Lisa Weinberger

Kurt v Austria: A missed chance to tackle intersectional discrimination and gender-based stereotyping in domestic violence cases

August 18, 2021

By Lisa Maria Weinberger* On 15 June 2021, the Grand Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) rendered its judgment on the domestic violence case Kurt v Austria. This case concerned a woman in Austria who experienced domestic violence at the hands of her husband, which resulted in his murdering their son. Based […]

  • Guest Blogger

Damage control after Georgia v Russia (II) – holding states responsible for human rights violations during armed conflict

February 08, 2021

By Jessica Gavron and Philip Leach, European Human Rights Advocacy Centre, London Introduction The European Court of Human Rights’ recent Grand Chamber judgment in the case of Georgia v Russia (II) has already been the subject of strong criticism, both from within the Human Rights Building and outside. For Judge Pinto de Albuquerque, the judgment […]

  • Guest Blogger

A Judgment to Be Reckoned with: Demirtaş v. Turkey (no. 2) [GC] and the ECtHR’s Stand Against Autocratic Legalism

February 05, 2021

By Ezgi Yildiz, Project Lead and Postdoctoral Researcher at the Global Governance Centre, the Graduate Institute, Geneva The recent Demirtaş v. Turkey (no. 2) [GC] judgment (application no. 14305/17) stands out not only for its substance but also its tone. The judgment provides an unequivocal solution to the protracted political crisis in Turkey concerning the […]

  • Guest Blogger

Regulating Signals intelligence

July 13, 2020

Iain Cameron is professor in public international law at Uppsala University Introduction For European states, an important factor pushing towards better regulation of security agencies generally has been the ECHR. The work of “signals intelligence” agencies (collecting metadata and the content of electronic mail and voice communications) came to prominence following the allegations of “mass […]

  • Lourdes Peroni

Paposhvili v. Belgium: Memorable Grand Chamber Judgment Reshapes Article 3 Case Law on Expulsion of Seriously Ill Persons

December 15, 2016

In what is possibly one of the most important judgments of 2016, Paposhvili v. Belgium, the Grand Chamber has memorably reshaped its Article 3 case law on the expulsion of seriously ill migrants. In a unanimous judgment, the Court leaves behind the restrictive application of the high Article 3 threshold set in N. v. the […]

  • Guest Blogger

Journalist must comply with police order to disperse while covering demonstration

October 26, 2015

By Dirk Voorhoof * Recently, the Council of Europe Task Force for Freedom of Expression and Media published a book under the title “Journalism at risk. Threats, challenges and perspectives”. Since a Grand Chamber judgment of the European Court of Human Rights of 20 October 2015, a new threat for journalistic freedom has obviously emerged, […]

  • Lourdes Peroni

Grand Chamber Hearing in Paposhvili v. Belgium: The End of N. v. the UK?

September 24, 2015

Few judgments have sparked more criticism than N. v. the United Kingdom. The high Article 3 threshold set in the case of a seriously ill woman expelled to Uganda where she died shortly after her return has been criticized both inside and outside the Court. Following what some considered a missed opportunity in S.J. v. […]

  • Guest Blogger

Vallianatos and Others v. Greece: What is in there for Lithuania?

January 13, 2014

This guest post was written by Natalija Bitiukova* Is it possible that having a discriminatory law allowing civil partnerships only for different-sex couples is better than having no law at all? After the Grand Chamber released its judgment in Vallianatos and Others v. Greece case, Lithuanian human rights advocates have realized that indeed it is. […]

  • Saïla Ouald Chaib

S.A.S. v. France: A short summary of an interesting hearing

November 29, 2013

On Wednesday, our research team attended the Grand Chamber hearing at the European Court of Human Rights in the case of S.A.S. v. France, in which we submitted a third party intervention on behalf of the Ghent University Human Rights Centre. The case concerns the French law banning the face veil, a highly debated piece […]

  • Guest Blogger

Scoppola v. Italy (no. 3): The Grand Chamber faces the “constitutional justice vs. individual justice” dilemma (but it doesn’t tell)

June 20, 2012

This guest post was written by Cesare Pitea, Researcher in International Law (Faculty of Law) and Assistant Professor of Interational Law (Faculty of Political Science), University of Parma (Italy). 1.       Judging in a Heated Political Context In the Scoppola  v. Italy (no. 3) judgment ([GC], no. 126/05, 22 May 2012),  the third chapter of the […]

  • Alexandra Timmer

Testimonial privilege for life-partners? The formalism of van der Heijden v Netherlands

April 11, 2012

When it comes to protecting family life, the Strasbourg Court is torn between realism and formalism. The recent Grand Chamber case of van der Heijden v Netherlands is a good example of this. The Court showed itself to be deeply divided over a question of testimonial privilege – meaning the right not to testify against […]

  • Guest Blogger

Criminal conviction of professor for refusal to give access to research files did not affect his Convention rights: Gillberg v. Sweden

April 04, 2012

This post on freedom of expression, academic research, privacy protection and access to official documents is written by Dirk Voorhoof* and Rónán Ó Fathaigh** The Grand Chamber of the European Court has, more firmly than its Chamber judgment of 2010, confirmed that a Swedish professor could not rely on his right of privacy under Article […]

  • Alexandra Timmer

Gender Justice in Strasbourg

March 22, 2012

Today, in the judgment of Konstantin Markin v. Russia, the Grand Chamber has re-defined its jurisprudence on sex discrimination. Regular readers of this blog will know that the “Strasbourg Observers” have taken a close interest in this case (see earlier posts here and here).  The Human Rights Centre of Ghent University – of which we […]

  • Alexandra Timmer

Stereotypes of Roma: Aksu v. Turkey in the Grand Chamber

March 20, 2012

 The Grand Chamber has handed down its much-awaited judgment in Aksu v. Turkey. This case concerns the use of derogatory stereotypical images of Roma in government-sponsored publications. The Grand Chamber holds with 16 votes to 1 that article 8 (right to private life) has not been violated. I have mixed feelings about the Court’s reasoning. […]

  • Alexandra Timmer

S.H. and Others v Austria: margin of appreciation and IVF

November 09, 2011

In Austria, it is forbidden to use donated sperm or ova for in vitro fertilization (‘IVF’). Ovum donation is under all circumstances prohibited; sperm donation is only possible when the sperm is directly placed in the womb of a woman (in vivo artificial insemination). Two Austrian couples complained about this regulation; the first couple needs […]