CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 24 juin 2025

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .s379BC09C { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:right } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .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 } .s10950C61 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify } .s5FFF0A75 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:7pt } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .s75A32C27 { border-collapse:collapse } .sDC014500 { height:32.5pt } .s3695F815 { 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 } .s19E96575 { height:33.05pt } .sE8934522 { border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .sD2EC4627 { height:65.6pt } .sF3616D70 { height:40.75pt } .s2EB42ED2 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:10pt } Published on 15 July 2025   FIRST SECTION Application no. 34068/23 Ondrej URBAN against Slovakia and 3 other applications (see list appended) communicated on 24 June 2025 SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE The applications concern the search on 16 and 17 August 2022 of the applicant law firm, of which the other three applicants are the partners (see   appended table for details), and the seizure of the law firm’s computer hard disc and several documents including handwritten notes belonging to the applicant in application no. 10131/24, carried out on the basis of a warrant for the securing and surrendering of computer data and of a search warrant for non-residential premises issued by prosecuting authorities. The applicants complain under Article 8 of the Convention that the search, allegedly carried out without judicial control, and the seizure of the computer hard disc and documents were unlawful, disproportionate and in breach of legal professional privilege. According to them, domestic law as in force at the relevant time did not provide for sufficient procedural guarantees against arbitrary and disproportionate interference with confidential information covered by lawyer-client privilege. The applicant in application no. 10131/24 also relies on Article 13 of the Convention.     QUESTIONS TO THE PARTIES 1.     Did the search in the applicant law firm, of which the other three applicants are the partners, and the seizure of the hard disc of the law firm’s computer and several documents, including handwritten notes belonging to the applicant in application no. 10131/24, constitute an interference with the applicants’ right to respect for their private life, home and correspondence within the meaning of Article 8 § 1 of the Convention?   2.     If so, was that interference in accordance with the law and necessary in terms of Article 8 § 2 of the Convention (see Kulák v. Slovakia , no.   57748/21, 3   April 2025)? In particular, were adequate, effective and sufficient safeguards against abuse, arbitrariness and breaches of legal professional privilege ensured (see Iliya Stefanov v. Bulgaria , no.   65755/01, 22   May 2008; Moskalev v. Russia , no. 44045/05, 7   November 2017; Kruglov and Others v.   Russia , nos. 11264/04 and 15   others, 4   February 2020; Močuļskis v. Latvia , no. 71064/12, 17   December 2020; and Särgava v. Estonia , no. 698/19, 16   November 2021)?       APPENDIX No. Application no. Case name Applicant Year of Birth/registration Place of Residence Nationality Represented by 1. 34068/23 Urban v. Slovakia Ondrej URBAN 1981 Slanská Huta Slovak Monika LICHNEROVÁ 2. 38641/23 Gašperec v. Slovakia Ivan GAŠPEREC 1982 Považská Bystrica Slovak Tomáš SISÁK 3. 9669/24 URBAN & PARTNERS s.r.o., advokátska kancelária v. Slovakia URBAN & PARTNERS S.R.O., ADVOKÁTSKA KANCELÁRIA 2013 Bratislava Slovak Monika LICHNEROVÁ 4. 10131/24 Bošanský v. Slovakia Marián BOŠANSKÝ 1986 Bratislava Slovak Tomáš SISÁK