issued by the Registrar of the Court
ECHR 249 (2024)
24.10.2024
Judgments and decisions of 24 October 2024
The European Court of Human Rights has today notified in writing 25 judgments1 and 55 decisions2:
two Chamber judgments are summarised below;
a separate press release has been issued for a Chamber judgment in the case of B.B. v. Slovakia
(application no. 48587/21);
22 Committee judgments, concerning issues which have already been examined by the Court, and
The judgment in French below is indicated with an asterisk (*).
Eckert v. France (application no. 56270/21)*
The applicant, Myriam Eckert, is a French national who was born in 1972 and lives in Bordeaux.
The case concerns the applicant’s criminal conviction for taking part in a “yellow vests” (“gilets
jaunes”) demonstration on Saturday 11 May 2019 which was banned by the prefect of Gironde.
Relying in particular on Article 11 (freedom of assembly and association) of the European
Convention on Human Rights, the applicant submits that her criminal conviction for participating in a
banned demonstration infringed her rights to freedom of expression and to freedom of peaceful
assembly.
No violation of Article 11
Drozdyk and Mikula v. Ukraine (nos. 27849/15 and 33358/15)
The applicants, Mariya Petrivna Drozdyk and Olga Pavlivna Mikula, are Ukrainian nationals who were
born in 1946 and 1949 respectively. They live, respectively, in Chudei (Chernivtsi Region) and
Bryukhovychi (Lviv Region) (both in Ukraine).
The case concerns the annulment of the applicants’ titles to plots of land, which they had used and
owned for decades, on the basis that the lands fell within railway exclusion zones and thus should
never have been transferred into private ownership.
They rely 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.
Violation of Article 1 of Protocol No.1
Just satisfaction:
non-pecuniary damage: 1,500 euros (EUR) to the second applicant
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.
