CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 15 novembre 2018

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .sFE10DC93 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .sA6BC7FA7 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:right } .s9793A85B { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt } .s5E1364CA { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .s8229ABDD { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center } .s68C46B95 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center } .s3F59B822 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; text-transform:uppercase } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .sCB9E0544 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:left }   Communicated on 15 November 2018       FOURTH SECTION Application no. 31235/16 T.P. against Ukraine lodged on 26 May 2016 SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE The application concerns denial of access to justice in the employment dispute between the applicant and the EU Delegation to Ukraine on the ground of the immunity of that diplomatic representation (see Cudak v.   Lithuania [GC], no. 15869/02, §§ 54-75, ECHR 2010). QUESTION tO THE PARTIES Has there been a violation of the applicant’s right of access to a court, within the meaning of Article 6 § 1 of the Convention, in view of the refusal by the Ukrainian courts to examine the applicant’s action against the Delegation of the European Union to Ukraine (see Cudak v. Lithuania [GC], no. 15869/02, ECHR 2010)?