issued by the Registrar of the Court

ECHR 393 (2022)

15.12.2022

Judgments and decisions of 15 December 2022

The European Court of Human Rights has today given notification in writing of 47 judgments¹and

83 decisions²:

four Chamber judgments are summarised below;

two separate press releases have been issued for Chamber judgments in the cases of Peradze and

Others v. Georgia (application no. 5631/16), and Vasaráb and Paulus v. Slovakia (nos. 28081/19 and

29664/19);

41 Committee judgments, concerning issues which have already been examined by the Court, and

the 83 decisions can be consulted on Hudoc and do not appear in this press release.

The judgments summarised below are available only in English.

Savalanli and Others v. Azerbaijan (application no. 54151/11)

The applicants, Jabbar Novruz oglu Savalanli, Faraj Ragif oglu Karimov, Siraj Ragif oglu Karimli and

Murad Gulahmad oglu Adilov are Azerbaijani nationals. They live in Sumgayit (Mr Savalanli) and

Baku.

The case concerns the arrest and pre-trial detention of the applicants, who are members and

activists of opposition political parties (except for Siraj Ragif oglu Karimli, who is the brother of Faraj

Ragif oglu Karimov), in connection with possession and trafficking of drugs.

Relying on Articles 5 §§ 1,3 and 4 (right to liberty and security) and Article 18 (limitation on the use

of restriction of rights) of the European Convention on Human Rights, the applicants complain, in

particular, that they were arrested and detained on the basis of planted evidence, and thus without

reasonable suspicion, on account of their anti-government activities, and that the courts failed to

provide adequate reasons for their pre-trial detention.

Violation of Article 5 § 1

Violation of Article 5 § 4

Just satisfaction:

non-pecuniary damage: 10,000 euros (EUR) to each applicant

costs and expenses: EUR 3,000 jointly to the second and the third applicants and EUR 2,000 to the

fourth applicant

Gherardi Martiri v. San Marino (no. 35511/20)

The applicant, Maria Cristina Gherardi Martiri, is an Italian national who was born in 1952 and lives

in Montelibretti (Italy).

Under Articles 43 and 44 of the Convention, Chamber judgments are not final. During the three-month period following a 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.

Inadmissibility and strike-out decisions are final.

In 2009 Ms Gherardi Martiri became aware that she had been defrauded by her bank, some of its

employees, and other persons. The case concerns criminal proceedings and civil proceedings taken

by Ms Gherardi Martiri in that connection. The criminal proceedings were discontinued as the

alleged offences were time-barred. The various civil proceedings did not result in her gaining

satisfaction (some appear to be still pending).

Relying on Article 6 (right to a fair trial) of the European Convention and Article 1 of Protocol No. 1

(protection of property) to the Convention, Ms Gherardi Martiri complains, in particular, that the

State failed to protect her property rights, and that the proceedings in her case were too long.

No violation of Article 1 of Protocol No. 1

Violation of Article 6 § 1

Just satisfaction:

non-pecuniary damage: EUR 4,000

Rutar and Rutar Marketing d.o.o. v. Slovenia (no. 21164/20)

The applicants, Gregor Rutar and Rutar Marketing d.o.o, are an Austrian national and a

Ljubljana-based company respectively. Mr Rutar lives in Klagenfurt (Austria).

The case concerns the refusal by the Nova Gorica Local Court to seek a preliminary ruling from the

Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) as requested by the applicants to clarify whether their

actions had been in accordance with EU directives. The proceedings concerned minor violations of

the Consumer Protection Act.

Relying on Article 6 § 1 (right to a fair trial) of the Convention, the applicants complain that the

failure to consider an application to seek a preliminary ruling from the CJEU violated their rights.

Violation of Article 6 § 1

Just satisfaction:

the applicants did not make any claim in respect of pecuniary or non-pecuniary damage

costs and expenses: EUR 5,000

Olivares Zúñiga v. Spain (no. 11/18)

The applicant, Mónica Ileana Olivares Zúñiga, is a Mexican national who was born in 1978 and lives

in Parla (Spain).

The applicant took proceedings in the Spanish courts after her dismissal as a lawyer in 2013. The

case concerns the Constitutional Court’s rejection of an amparo appeal in her case because she had

not used all legal avenues, in particular an action for annulment.

Relying on Article 6 § 1 (right to a fair trial/access to court), the applicant complains that the

Constitutional Court’s decision was unfair.

Violation of Article 6 § 1

Just satisfaction:

non-pecuniary damage: EUR 9,600

costs and expenses: EUR 8,720

This press release is a document produced by the Registry. It does not bind the Court. Decisions,

judgments and further information about the Court can be found on www.echr.coe.int. To receive

the Court’s press releases, please subscribe here: www.echr.coe.int/RSS/en or follow us on Twitter

@ECHR_CEDH.