CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 15 février 2024

.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 } .s76CF415B { page-break-before:always; clear:both } .sA1D3DA2E { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:justify } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } Published on 4 March 2024   FOURTH SECTION Application no. 62815/19 Alexandru MUNTEAN against Romania lodged on 21 November 2019 communicated on 15 February 2024 SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE The application concerns an alleged discriminatory treatment on grounds of age by a court, when granting non-pecuniary damages. The applicant, victim of a physical assault which necessitated eight days of hospitalisation, two surgeries and 50-55 days of medical care, was granted by the Întorsura Buzăului District Court 20,000 euros in respect of non ‑ pecuniary damages, a sum which the court considered appropriate given the gravity of the acts committed against the applicant and the severity of the injuries suffered, and bearing in mind the time the applicant had been incapacitated by the injuries (decision of 16 April 2019). In a final decision of 4 July 2019, the Braşov Court of Appeal reduced the award to EUR 5,000 on the grounds that the consequences of the injuries suffered were not severe or long-lasting and that, as the applicant was 65 years old at that time, it was no longer relevant whether his work capacity had been affected by the injuries suffered. The applicant complains under Articles 2, 6 and 14 of the Convention. QUESTIONS TO THE PARTIES 1.     Has there been a violation of the applicant’s right to respect for his private life, contrary to Article   8 of the Convention, bearing in mind the final decision of 4 July 2019 of the Braşov Court of Appeal?   2.     Has the applicant suffered discrimination on the grounds of his age, contrary to Article 14 of the Convention read in conjunction with Article 8, bearing in mind the reasons advanced by the Braşov Court of Appeal in the final decision of 4 July 2019 for reducing the amount of non-pecuniary damages, in particular the reference solely to the applicant’s age when assessing the relevance of the loss of his work capacity as a result of the injuries incurred during the criminal assault against him (see, for instance, Carvalho Pinto de Sousa Morais v. Portugal , no. 17484/15, §§   44-45, 49 and   55-56, 25 July 2017; and Schwizgebel v.   Switzerland , no.   25762/07, § 85, ECHR 2010 (extracts))?