issued by the Registrar of the Court
ECHR 302 (2024)
17.12.2024
Judgments of 17 December 2024
The European Court of Human Rights has today notified in writing ten judgments1:
three Chamber judgments are summarised below;
a separate press release has been issued for another Chamber judgment in the case of Taganova
and Others v. Georgia and Russia (applications nos. 18102/04, 5148/04, 26166/05, 42765/05, and
48656/06);
The six Committee judgments, concerning issues which have already been examined by the Court
The judgments summarised below are available only in English.
Gaba v. Albania (application no. 33369/17)
The applicant, Hasan Gaba, was an Albanian national who was born in 1940 and died in 2018. He
lived in Tirana.
The case concerns the annulment of a decision by a property commission which had awarded a plot
of mountain pastureland in Lazarat to the applicant several years earlier. The applicant alleged that
that land had belonged to his father but had been expropriated sometime after 1945 by the
communist authorities. Although the decision to restore the plot of land to the applicant had
become final in 2006, it was quashed in 2010 to enable the construction of a broadcast relay station
(pike transmetimi radio televizive).
The applicant complained that the annulment of the decision breached the principle of legal
certainty under Article 6 § 1 (right to a fair hearing) of the European Convention on Human Rights.
The Court held that the applicant’s heirs have standing to pursue the application.
Violation of Article 6 § 1 on account of the domestic authorities annulling the 2006 decision of the
property restitution commission in the applicant’s favour
Just satisfaction:
non-pecuniary damage: 3,600 euros (EUR)
costs and expenses: EUR 3,500
Hellgren v. Finland (no. 52977/19)
The applicant, Anu Marjaana Hellgren, is a Finnish national who was born in 1976 and lives in Tuulos
(Finland). She was employed as a postal worker for the Finnish postal service – which is operated by
a State-owned company governed by private law named Posti Oy.
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
