issued by the Registrar of the Court
ECHR 218 (2024)
19.09.2024
Judgments and decisions of 19 September 2024
The European Court of Human Rights has today notified in writing four judgments1 and five decisions2:
two Chamber judgments are summarised below;
a separate press release has been issued for the decision in the case of Morelli v. Italy (application
no. 23984/19);
two Committee judgments, concerning issues which have already been examined by the Court, and
The judgments summarised below are available only in English.
M.D. and Others v. Hungary (application no. 60778/19)
The applicants are an Afghan family of six. They currently live in Oldenburg (Germany).
The case concerns the family’s removal from Hungary to Serbia. The family, who had fled Iran, arrived
in January 2019 at the Röszke transit zone situated at the Hungarian border with Serbia. The Hungarian
authorities rejected their asylum application and ordered their removal to Serbia. Serbia refused to
readmit them and their destination country was changed to Afghanistan. Instead of being expelled to
Afghanistan, however, the applicant family allege that in May 2019 they were driven from the transit
zone and made to cross the border to Serbia. According to the Hungarian Government, the family had
wanted to leave for Serbia.
Relying on Article 4 of Protocol No. 4 (prohibition of collective expulsion) to the European Convention
on Human Rights, taken alone and in conjunction with Article 13 (right to an effective remedy) of the
European Convention, the applicants complain that they were forced to return to Serbia, without a
valid decision ordering their expulsion to that State, without regard for the Serbian authorities’ refusal
to readmit them and without their having had access to an interpreter or a lawyer.
Violation of Article 4 of Protocol No. 4
Just satisfaction:
non-pecuniary damage: 9,000 euros (EUR) to the applicants jointly
Trapitsyna and Isaeva v. Hungary (no. 5488/22)
The applicants, Elena Trapitsyna, and her daughter, Szofia Isaeva, are Russian nationals who were born
in 1965 and 2008. They live in Vienna.
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.
