The European Court of Human Rights, also known as the Strasbourg Court, is an international court of the Council of Europe which interprets the European Convention on Human Rights. The court hears applications alleging that a contracting state has breached one or more of the human rights enumerated in the Convention or its optional protocols to which a member state is a party. The European Convention on Human Rights is also referred to by the initials "ECHR". The court is based in Strasbourg, France.
Dudgeon v the United Kingdom (1981) was a European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) case, which held that Section 11 of the Criminal Law Amendment Act 1885 which criminalised male homosexual acts in England, Wales and Northern Ireland violated the European Convention on Human Rights. The case was significant
- as the first successful case before the ECtHR on the criminalisation of male homosexuality
- as the case which led to legislation in 1982 bringing the law on male homosexuality in Northern Ireland into line with that in Scotland and in England and Wales ;
- as a lead-in to Norris v. Ireland, a later case before the ECtHR argued by Mary Robinson, which challenged the continued application of the same 1885 law in the Republic of Ireland; and,
- for setting the legal precedent that ultimately resulted in the Council of Europe requiring that no member state could criminalise male or female homosexual behaviour.
Funke v. France was a legal case heard by the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) in September 1992, with the court publishing its judgement on 25 February 1993. The case was given to the Court in December 1991, the application had been made in February 1984, and related to events occurring in 1980.
Vassili Makarovich Kononov or Vasiliy Makarovich Kononov was a Soviet partisan during World War II, who was convicted by Latvian supreme court as a war criminal. He is the only former Soviet partisan convicted of crimes against humanity.
Nikolay Tess was one of the few functionaries in charge of political repressions in the former Soviet Union who were convicted for this activity.
Andrejeva v. Latvia (55707/00) was a case decided by the Grand Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights in 2009. It concerned ex parte proceedings and discrimination in calculating retirement pensions for non-citizens of Latvia.
Podkolzina v. Latvia (46726/99) was a case argued before the European Court of Human Rights and decided in 2002.
Latvian Human Rights Committee is a human rights non-governmental organization in Latvia. It is member of international human rights and anti-racism NGOs FIDH, AEDH. Co-chairpersons of LHRC are Vladimirs Buzajevs and Natalija Jolkina. According to the authors of the study "Ethnopolitics in Latvia", former CBSS Commissioner on Democratic Institutions and Human Rights Ole Espersen "had visited LHRC various times and had used mostly the data of that organisation in his views on Latvia".
Handyside v United Kingdom (5493/72) was a case decided by the European Court of Human Rights in 1976. Its conclusion contains the famous phrase that:
Freedom of expression ... is applicable not only to 'information' or 'ideas' that are favourably received or regarded as inoffensive or as a matter of indifference, but also to those that offend, shock or disturb the State or any sector of the population.
Cyprus v. Turkey (IV) (2001) is a case raised by Cyprus against Turkey in 1994 and decided on merits by the Grand Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights in 2001. It concerns the situation existing in Northern Cyprus after 1974 Turkish invasion of Cyprus and the de facto separation of the Mediterranean island.
D.H. and Others v. the Czech Republic was a case decided by the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) concerning discrimination of Romani children in the education system of the Czech Republic. It was the first case of racial segregation in education to be considered by the ECtHR. As of 2021 the case is still pending at the Committee of Ministers and has not been resolved by the Czech authorities.
Vogt v. Germany (1996) 21 EHRR 205, (17851/91) was a case decided by the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) in 1995. The case concerned a Mrs. Vogt who was suspended from her teaching job at a public secondary school because of her past membership in the German Communist Party. The ECHR ruled that this application of Berufsverbot violated provisions in the European Convention on Human Rights relating to freedom of expression and freedom of association.
Oršuš and Others v. Croatia (15766/03) was a case heard before the European Court of Human Rights, concerning activities of Roma-only classes in some schools of Croatia, which were held legal by the Constitutional Court of Croatia in 2007 by a decision no. U-III-3138/2002.
Ciubotaru v. Moldova was a case decided by European Court of Human Rights in 2010. Mihai Ciubotaru sought to have his ethnicity changed from Moldovan to Romanian on his birth and marriage certificates, which Moldova refused. The Court found that Moldova's procedure for changing ethnicity of record violated Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights.
Leela Förderkreis e.V. and Others v. Germany was a case decided by the European Court of Human Rights in 2008.
Tănase v. Moldova was a case decided by the European Court of Human Rights in 2010.
Kokkinakis v. Greece is a landmark case of the European Court of Human Rights, decided in 1993 and concerning compatibility of certain sanctions for proselytism with Articles 7 and 9 of the European Convention on Human Rights. It ruled by a vote of six-to-three that a Jehovah's Witness man's freedom to manifest his religion, protected by Article 9, had been violated by the Greek government. One of the judges wrote that this case was "of particular importance" because it was "the first real case concerning freedom of religion to have come before the European Court since it was set up" in 1959.
Baka v. Hungary was a case of the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) heard by the second section of the court in 2014 and the Grand Chamber in 2016. Both the section and the Grand Chamber found that Hungary had violated the rights of András Baka, the former head of Hungary's supreme court who was dismissed after criticizing the government's judicial reforms.