Last Updated: Friday, 17 November 2017, 15:16 GMT

Council of Europe: European Court of Human Rights

The Court, based in Strasbourg, was set up as a result of the European Convention on Human Rights, created in 1950. This set out a catalogue of civil and political rights and freedoms. It allows people to lodge complaints against States which have signed up to the Convention for alleged violations of those rights. Although founded in 1950, the Court did not actually come into existence until 1959. It gained its present form as a single European Court of Human Rights when Protocol No. 11 to the ECHR took effect in 1998.

The Court is currently made up of 47 judges, one in principle for every State signed up to the Convention. They are elected by the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe and serve for six years. Judges sit on the Court as individuals and do not represent their country.  Website: www.echr.coe.int/Pages/home.aspx?p=home
Selected filters: Case Law Poland
Filter:
Showing 1-10 of 12 results
Gorny v. Poland

8 June 2010 | Judicial Body: Council of Europe: European Court of Human Rights | Topic(s): Criminal justice - Evidence (including age and language assessments / medico-legal reports) - Rule of law / Due process / Procedural fairness | Countries: Poland

Kozak v. Poland

2 March 2010 | Judicial Body: Council of Europe: European Court of Human Rights | Topic(s): Family law - Lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and intersex (LGBTI) - Right to family life | Countries: Poland

Adamkiewicz c. Pologne

2 March 2010 | Judicial Body: Council of Europe: European Court of Human Rights | Topic(s): Criminal justice - Independence of judiciary - Legal representation / Legal aid | Countries: Poland

Muskhadzhiyeva et autres c. Belgique

19 January 2010 | Judicial Body: Council of Europe: European Court of Human Rights | Topic(s): Asylum-seekers - Children's rights - Deportation / Forcible return - Freedom from torture, inhuman and degrading treatment - Immigration Detention - Safe country of origin - Single procedure | Countries: Russian Federation

A.E. v. Poland

This judgment will become final in the circumstances set out in Article 44 § 2 of the Convention. It may be subject to editorial revision.

31 March 2009 | Judicial Body: Council of Europe: European Court of Human Rights | Topic(s): Criminal justice - Freedom of movement - Right to family life - Right to justice | Countries: Libya - Poland

Tysiac v. Poland

This judgment will become final in the circumstances set out in Article 44 § 2 of the Convention. It may be subject to editorial revision.

20 March 2007 | Judicial Body: Council of Europe: European Court of Human Rights | Topic(s): Persons with disabilities - Sexual and reproductive rights | Countries: Poland

Niedzwiecki v. Germany

15 February 2006 | Judicial Body: Council of Europe: European Court of Human Rights | Topic(s): Prevention of discrimination - Residence permits / Residency - Right to family life - Rule of law / Due process / Procedural fairness | Countries: Germany - Poland

Okpisz v. Germany

Final judgment: 15 February 2006. Similar to: Niedzwiecki v. Germany, Final judgment of 25 October 2005, Appl. No. 58453/00 Facts: The applicants in both cases are immigrants, in possession of residence permits for exceptional purposes. Their requests for child benefits were rejected as they were not in possession of unlimited residence permits or provisional residence permits, as required by law. In the Niedzwiecki case all appeals in the domestic proceedings were rejected. In the Okpisz case the applicant?s appeal was suspended after the Social Court of Appeal had referred some pilot cases to the Federal Constitutional Court. In a judgment of 6 July 2004 the Federal Constitutional Court found that the different treatment of parents who were and who were not in possession of a stable residential permit lacked sufficient justification. After that decision, the applicant?s appeal was again suspended pending the amendment of the applicable legislation. Complaint before the Court: The applicants complained that the German authority?s refusal of child benefits amounted to discrimination in violation of Article 14 ECHR in conjunction with Article 8 ECHR. Legal Argumentation: The Court held that granting child benefits come within the scope of respect for family life as guaranteed in Article 8 ECHR and therefore Article 14 ? taken together with Article 8 ECHR ? is applicable. The Court found no ?objective and reasonable justification? for the applicants to be treated differently (para. 32 of Niedzwiecki v. Germany and para. 33 of Okpisz v. Germany) Therefore the Court found a violation of Article 14 ECHR in conjunction with Article 8 ECHR.

25 October 2005 | Judicial Body: Council of Europe: European Court of Human Rights | Topic(s): Residence permits / Residency | Countries: Germany - Poland

Gordyeyev v. Poland

3 May 2005 | Judicial Body: Council of Europe: European Court of Human Rights | Topic(s): Decision on admissibility | Countries: Belarus - Poland

Shamsa c. Pologne

The detention of the applicants in the transit zone beyond the deadline for their expulsion was therefore declared contrary to Art. 5 para. 1 of the ECHR. The judgment is only available in French.

27 November 2003 | Judicial Body: Council of Europe: European Court of Human Rights | Topic(s): Deportation / Forcible return - Expulsion | Countries: Libya - Poland

Search Refworld