issued by the Registrar of the Court  
ECHR 278 (2024)  
28.11.2024  
Judgments and decisions of 28 November 2024  
The European Court of Human Rights has today notified in writing 14 judgments1 and 53 decisions2:  
one Chamber judgment is summarised below;  
13 Committee judgments, concerning issues which have already been examined by the Court, and  
the 53 decisions, can be consulted on Hudoc and do not appear in this press release.  
The judgment summarised below is available only in English.  
Klaudia Csikós v. Hungary (application no. 31091/16)  
The applicant, Klaudia Csikós, is a Hungarian national who was born in 1975 and lives in Budapest.  
She is a journalist for Blikk, a daily newspaper.  
The case concerns the alleged tapping of telephone calls between the applicant and one of her close  
acquaintances, a police officer, over a three-day period, apparently with a view to revealing her  
journalistic sources within the police in the context of an investigation into abuse of authority.  
Relying on Articles 8 (right to respect for private and family life), 10 (freedom of expression) and  
13 (right to an effective remedy) of the European Convention on Human Rights, she complains about  
the tapping of those telephone conversations and that she was denied an effective remedy in that  
connection.  
Violation of Article 8  
Violation of Article 10  
Just satisfaction:  
non-pecuniary damage: 6,500 euros (EUR)  
costs and expenses: EUR 7,000  
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  
https://www.echr.coe.int/home. To receive the Court’s press releases, please subscribe here:  
www.echr.coe.int/RSS/en or follow us on X (Twitter) @ECHR_CEDH.  
Press contacts  
[email protected]e.int | tel.: +33 3 90 21 42 08  
We are happy to receive journalists’ enquiries via either email or telephone.  
Tracey Turner-Tretz (tel.: + 33 3 88 41 35 30)  
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.  
Denis Lambert (tel.: + 33 3 90 21 41 09)  
Inci Ertekin (tel.: + 33 3 90 21 55 30)  
Neil Connolly (tel.: + 33 3 90 21 48 05)  
Jane Swift (tel.: + 33 3 88 41 29 04)  
The European Court of Human Rights was set up in Strasbourg by the Council of Europe member  
States in 1959 to deal with alleged violations of the 1950 European Convention on Human Rights.  
2