issued by the Registrar of the Court

ECHR 108 (2024)

07.05.2024

Judgments and decisions of 7 May 2024

The European Court of Human Rights has today notified in writing six judgments¹and four

decisions²:

four Chamber judgments are summarised below;

a separate press release has been issued for a Chamber judgment in the case of A.K. v. Russia

(application no. 49014/16);

one Committee judgment, concerning issues which have already been examined by the Court, and

the four decisions, can be consulted on Hudoc and does not appear in this press release.

The judgments summarised below are available only in English.

Biba v. Albania (application no. 24228/18)

The applicant, Tonin Biba, is an Albanian national who was born in 1968 and lives in New York

(United States of America).

The case concerns an assault on Mr Biba’s son which was carried out by another student at the Ylber

private school in Tirana that they both attended, and the authorities’ reaction to the incident,

including the court proceedings. His son lost 90% of his vision in one eye as a result.

Relying on Article 3 (prohibition of inhuman or degrading treatment), Article 6 (right to a fair trial),

and Article 8 (right to respect for private and family life) of the European Convention on Human

Rights, Mr Biba complains that the State had not fulfil its positive obligations to protect his son from

violence, of the length of proceedings before the Supreme Court, and of being denied access to the

Constitutional Court.

Violation of Article 8

Violation of Article 6 § 1 - on account of the applicant’s lack of access to the Constitutional Court

Just satisfaction:

non-pecuniary damage: 11,700 euros (EUR)

costs and expenses: EUR 5,000

Tsaava and Others v. Georgia (no. 13186/20 and 4 others)

The applicants are 26 Georgian nationals.

The case concerns the dispersal of a protest on 20-21 June 2019 from the front of the Parliament

building in Tbilisi. The protest was sparked by a prominent member of the Russian Duma’s sitting in

the Speaker’s chair in the Georgian Parliament and delivering a speech in Russian as part of a session

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

Inadmissibility and strike-out decisions are final.

of the Interparliamentary Assembly on Orthodoxy. The applicants were either participants in the

demonstration, or journalists reporting on the protests.

Relying, explicitly or in substance, on Article 3 (prohibition of inhuman or degrading treatment) of

the European Convention, the applicants allege that their injuries were a result of excessive use of

force, and that the investigation into this matter was not effective. The applicants also rely on

Articles 10 (freedom of expression), 11 (freedom of assembly) and 13 (right to an effective remedy)

of the Convention.

Some of the applicants also allege, under Article 38 (examination of the case), that the Government

failed in their duty to proactively inform the Court of developments relevant to their case, in

particular new legislation.

Violation of Article 3 (investigation)

No violation of Article 38

Just satisfaction: Details of the amounts awarded to the applicants for non-pecuniary damage, as

well as costs and expenses, are appended to the judgment.

Thomaidis v. Greece (no. 28345/16)

The applicant, Kyriakos Thomaidis, is a Greek national who was born in 1961 and lives in Thessaloniki

(Greece).

The case concerns reporting by Mr Thomaidis, who is a journalist and presenter of the major

television programme “Trial at SKAI” (η δίκη στον ΣΚΑΙ), into allegations of football match-fixing, and

his losing a civil action as a result and being ordered to pay 10,000 euros in compensation to V.M., a

club chairman and vice-chairman of the Hellenic Football Federation.

Relying on Article 10 (freedom of expression) of the Convention, Mr Thomaidis complains that the

Greek courts’ ordering him to pay compensation violated his freedom of expression.

No violation of Article 10

A.D. and Others v. Sweden (no. 22283/21)

The applicants are five Albanian nationals who were born between 1977 and 2009. They are a

mother, father and their three children.

The case concerns the order to remove the applicants to Albania following their failed application for

asylum in Sweden. The allege that they are at risk from private individuals in Albania, and that the

Albanian State would be unable to protect them.

Relying on Article 3 (prohibition of inhuman or degrading treatment), the applicants complain that

their removal to Albania would put them at risk of being ill-treated.

No violation of Article 3 - in case of the applicants’ removal to Albania

Interim measure (Rule 39 of the Rules of Court): still in force until the present judgment becomes

final or until further notice.

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.

Press contacts