issued by the Registrar of the Court
ECHR 002 (2026)
06.01.2026
Judgments of 6 January 2026
The European Court of Human Rights has today notified in writing two Chamber judgments1 which are
summarised below.
The judgments are available only in English.
The applicant, Yasemin Altıner Akıncı, is a Turkish national who was born in 1973 and lives in Muğla
(Türkiye).
The case concerns compulsory sports arbitration proceedings. Ms Altıner Akıncı is a professional beach
volleyball referee. Invitations issued to her in 2021 and 2022 to referee in two international
competitions were withdrawn as the Central Referee and Observer Committee of the Turkish
Volleyball Association had not included her in the list of referees eligible to referee matches in such
competitions. Proceedings brought by Ms Altıner Akıncı before the Sports Arbitration Board of the
Ministry of Sports challenging those decisions were unsuccessful.
Relying on Article 6 § 1 (right to a fair hearing) and Article 8 (right to respect for private and family life)
of the European Convention on Human Rights, the applicant alleges a breach of her right to a fair
hearing by an independent and impartial tribunal, a lack of sufficient judicial review and an unjustified
interference with her right to exercise her profession.
No violation of Article 6 § 1 as regards the alleged lack of independence and impartiality of the Sports
Arbitration Board
Violation of Article 6 § 1 due to the lack of sufficient judicial review by the Sports Arbitration
Board
Just satisfaction:
non-pecuniary damage: 6,000 euros (EUR)
costs and expenses: EUR 2,000
The applicant, Kutay Yokuşlu, is a Turkish national who was born in 1999 and lives in İzmir (Türkiye).
The case concerns a dispute between the applicant, a professional football player, and the Board of
Directors of the Turkish Football Federation (TFF) about the revocation of a contract termination
notice. Mr Yokuşlu’s lawyer mistakenly filed a contract termination notice on behalf of Mr Yokuşlu
with the TFF in early July 2023, but then, together with the Football Club, sought to retract the
termination notice, submitting that it had been sent to the TFF by mistake. The Board of Directors of
the TFF rejected Mr Yokuşlu’s request. Proceedings brought by the applicant before the Arbitration
Committee of the TFF challenging the Board of Directors’ decision were unsuccessful.
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
