CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 3 février 2023

.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 } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .s76CF415B { page-break-before:always; clear:both } .sF0E7BF98 { width:106.04%; border-collapse:collapse } .s77B0634B { width:7.32%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .s2EF62ED2 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:12pt } .sEECE831 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; color:#474747 } .s7994C062 { width:49.02%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .s41841787 { width:23.24%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .s5C0602A { width:20.42%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .sCF8EBB52 { width:7.32%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s48BB27BB { width:49.02%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s1A2C98F0 { width:23.24%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s50991BC5 { width:20.42%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .sA1D3DA2E { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:justify } Published on 20 February 2023   THIRD SECTION Application no. 51020/22 Marina LOLI and Others against Greece lodged on 27 October 2022 communicated on 3 February 2023 SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE The application concerns the issue of access to court in view of the dismissal of an application for annulment of the measure of school closures during the pandemic. In the context of the COVID-19 health crisis, the national authorities by issuing successive joint ministerial decisions, decided school closures, which lasted from March 2020 to May 2020 and, after the second outbreak of the pandemic, from November 2020 to January 2021 and from February 2021 to April 2021. On 21 April 2021 the applicants, minor students together with their parents, lodged before the Supreme Administrative Court an application for annulment of the measure in question. The relevant ministerial decision in force at the time was applicable for one week, namely from 19 April 2021 to 26 April 2021. On the same day, the applicants also submitted a request to accelerate the proceedings, arguing that the joint ministerial decision providing for the measure in question would expire soon. The hearing took place on 15 June 2021. The Supreme Administrative Court by its judgment no. 1904/2021 held that there was no need to adjudicate on the grounds that the contested act was no longer in force. Applying Article 32 of Presidential Decree no. 18/1989, it ruled that the applicants did not have a special legal interest ( ιδιαίτερο έννομο συμφέρον ) to pursue the annulment process since the contested ministerial decision had expired. Relying on Article 6 § 1 of the Convention, the applicants complain that the Supreme Administrative Court’s failure to schedule an earlier hearing, despite their request, together with its consideration that they lacked special legal interest in pursuing their application, had prevented them from having their claim determined on the merits in breach of their right of access to a court. QUESTION TO THE PARTIES Was the right of   access to court, as guaranteed by Aticle 6 § 1 of the Convention, respected in the present case (see, mutatis mutandis , Frezadou v.   Greece , no. 2683/12,   §§ 43-50, 8 November 2018), taking into account the short duration of the contested COVID-19 measures?     APPENDIX Application no. 51020/22 No. Applicant’s Name Year of birth Nationality 1. Marina LOLI 1985 Greek 2. Lamprini DEMOU 1980 Greek 3. Anna GLYMIDAKI 1977 Greek 4. Eleni KARACHALIOU 1978 Greek 5. Konstantinos KRONTIRIS 1976 Greek 6. Vasilios KRONTIRIS 2014 Greek 7. Vagia Maria KYRZIDI 2014 Greek 8. Michail KYRZIDIS 1977 Greek 9. Evaggelia LEMPESI 1983 Greek 10. Christos LIAPATIS 1976 Greek 11. Odysseas LIAPATIS 2015 Greek 12. Ioanna MAKRAKI 1978 Greek 13. Charis MITROPOULOS 2014 Greek 14. Vasilios MITROPOULOS 1977 Greek 15. Lygia MITROPOULOU 2017 Greek 16. Frideriki PANA 2011 Greek 17. Aristidis PANAS 2009 Greek 18. Doukas PANAS 1978 Greek 19. Ismini PANTZALI 2014 Greek 20. Zoi PANTZALI 2016 Greek 21. Symeon PANTZALIS 1981 Greek 22. Athanasios THIRIOS 1980 Greek 23. Alkyoni Christina THIRIOU 2016 Greek 24. Stavroula Petrina THIRIOU 2014 Greek 25. Christina TSAROUCHI 1976 Greek 26. Spyridon TSAROUCHIS 2015 Greek 27. Panagiota TZIVELOU 1977 Greek