D’Ascia; the parties’ observations; Having deliberated in private on 21 May 2024, Delivers the following judgment, which was adopted on that date: SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE 1.

inadmissible the remainder of the application; the parties’ observations; the decision to reject the Government’s objection to examination of the application by a Committee;   Having deliberated in private

    Everyone has the right to respect for his private and family life, his home and his correspondence. 2.

    Everyone has the right to respect for his private and family life, his home and his correspondence. 2.

Violation of Article 8 - Right to respect for private and family life (Article 8-1 - Respect for private life)

sitting as a Committee composed of:   Darian Pavli, President,   Dmitry Dedov,   Peeter Roosma, judges, and Viktoriya Maradudina, Acting Deputy Section Registrar, Having deliberated in private

    Everyone has the right to respect for his private and family life, his home and his correspondence. 2.

the application (Rule 41 of the Rules of Court); the parties’ observations; the decision to reject the Government’s objection to examination of the application by a Committee; Having deliberated in private

    Article 10 of the Constitution guarantees the right to privacy: “Everyone’s private life, honour and the sanctity of the home are guaranteed.

A private prosecutor ( privatni tužitelj ) was an injured party who brought a private prosecution in respect of criminal offences for which such a prosecution was expressly allowed by the Criminal Code

    The general principles concerning the lawfulness of search and seizure measures in the context of the right to private life have been summarised in Vinks and Ribicka v.

Violation of Article 8 - Right to respect for private and family life (Article 8-1 - Respect for private life)

    Everyone has the right to respect for his private and family life, his home and his correspondence. 2.

According to the applicant, the subject matter of his complaint was his removal to Tajikistan, which allegedly violated his right to private and family life guaranteed by Article 17 of the International

, which protects privacy, honour and reputation. 38.

Invoking Article 8 of the Convention, the applicant alleged that the impugned measure breached his right to respect for his private life. 12.

Violation of Article 8 - Right to respect for private and family life (Article 8-1 - Respect for private life)

Ezer; the parties’ observations; Having deliberated in private on 20 February 2024, Delivers the following judgment, which was adopted on that date: SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE 1.

Violation of Article 8 - Right to respect for private and family life (Article 8-1 - Respect for private life)