issued by the Registrar of the Court
ECHR 230 (2022)
05.07.2022
Judgments and decisions of 5 July 2022
The European Court of Human Rights has today given notification in writing of 12 judgments1 and
two decisions 2:
two Chamber judgments are summarised below;
separate press releases have been issued for three other Chamber judgments in the cases of Loizides
v. Cyprus (application no. 31029/15), Association of Civil Servants and Union for Collective Bargaining
and Others v. Germany (nos. 815/18, 3278/18, 12380/18, 12693/18, and 14883/18), and Dimici
v. Türkiye (no. 70133/16);
seven Committee judgments, concerning issues which have already been examined by the Court,
The judgments below are available only in English.
Drousiotis v. Cyprus (application no. 42315/15)
The applicant, Makarios Drousiotis, is a Cypriot national who was born in 1959 and lives in Nicosia.
The case concerns a judgment given against Mr Drousiotis, a journalist, in civil defamation
proceedings. The domestic courts found against him for an article published in Politis, a daily
newspaper, on the Government’s extending of the term of office of a then high-ranking attorney in
the Law Office of the Republic of Cyprus past the compulsory retirement age.
Mr Drousiotis relies on Article 10 (freedom of expression) of the European Convention on Human
Rights.
Violation of Article 10
Just satisfaction:
non-pecuniary damage: EUR 12,000 euros
costs and expenses: EUR 5,362.50
Lilian Erhan v. the Republic of Moldova (no. 21947/16)
The applicant, Lilian Erhan, is a Moldovan national who was born in 1974 and lives in Chișinău.
The case concerns the applicant’s conviction for drink driving. The courts relied on his breathalyser
test rather than on a blood test taken later at hospital, which was ruled inadmissible as he had been
unaccompanied when giving it. Mr Erhan asserts that he tried to get a police officer to accompany
him, to no avail.
Relying on Article 6 (right to a fair trial) and Article 8 (right to respect for private and family life) of
the European Convention, Mr Erhan alleges, in particular, that it was impossible for him to secure
1
Under Articles 43 and 44 of the Convention, Chamber judgments are not final. During the three-month period following a Chamber
judgment’s delivery, any party may request that the case be referred to the Grand Chamber of the Court. If such a request is made, a
panel of five judges considers whether the case deserves further examination. In that event, the Grand Chamber will hear the case and
deliver a final judgment. If the referral request is refused, the Chamber judgment will become final on that day. Under Article 28 of the
Convention, judgments delivered by a Committee are final.
Once a judgment becomes final, it is transmitted to the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe for supervision of its execution.
Further information about the execution process can be found here: www.coe.int/t/dghl/monitoring/execution
2
Inadmissibility and strike-out decisions are final.
