CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 4 février 2022

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .s379BC09C { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:right } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .s10950C61 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify } .s5E1364CA { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .s339D85E6 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:14pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s665E407E { margin-top:66pt; margin-bottom:14pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .s76CF415B { page-break-before:always; clear:both } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } Published on 21 February 2022   FOURTH SECTION Application no. 11375/21 Simona-Alberta TINU against Romania lodged on 18 February 2021 communicated on 4 February 2022 SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE The application concerns the alleged unauthorised access of the applicant’s email and social media accounts by her husband during their divorce. In her complaint to the police, the applicant submitted that her husband had accessed her accounts without her authorisation, repeatedly, in order to obtain information about her that he could use in the divorce proceedings. The complaint had been rejected with final effect by the Bucharest County Court on 31 July 2020 (communicated to the applicant on 26 August 2020). The court found, on the basis of the information given by the applicant’s husband, that in fact the applicant had allowed him to access her accounts in the past and therefore, the crime of unlawful access to an informatic system, as set forth by Article 360(1) and (3) of the Criminal Code, did not exist. The applicant complained under Article 8 of the Convention of a breach of her right to private life and correspondence due to the authorities’ failure to protect her from the unlawful access of her personal information. QUESTION TO THE PARTIES Have the State authorities complied with their positive obligation, as guaranteed by Article 8 of the Convention, to protect the applicant’s right to respect for her private life and correspondence (see, mutatis mutandis , M.P. v.   Portugal , no. 27516/14, 7 September 2021)?