CEDH · PRESS;FORTHCOMINGJUDGMENTS;ENG — 25 mai 2007

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .sFE10DC93 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .s40F41F73 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:right } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .sADADF4A7 { font-family:Arial; text-decoration:underline } .s4DDA3AA3 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; font-style:italic } .s5F2C5AAE { width:132.81pt; display:inline-block } .sCB9E0544 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:left } .sC7EAD8B { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; text-decoration:underline } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS   343 25.5.2007   Press release issued by the Registrar   FORTHCOMING CHAMBER JUDGMENTS   31 May 2007   The European Court of Human Rights will be notifying in writing 24 Chamber judgments on Thursday 31 May 2007.   Press releases and texts of the judgments will be available at 11 a.m. (local time) on the Court’s Internet site ( http://www.echr.coe.int ).   Ortner v. Austria (application no. 2884/04) The applicant, Anton Ortner, is an Austrian national who was born in 1942 and lives in Tristach (Austria).   He relies on Article 6 § 1 (right to a fair hearing within a reasonable time) and Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 (protection of property) to the European Convention on Human Rights.   Bistrović v. Croatia (no. 25774/05) The applicants, Josip Bistrović and his wife Jasenka Bistrović, are Croatian nationals who were born in 1951 and 1955 respectively. They live in Gojanec (Croatia).   They rely on Article 6 § 1 (right to a fair hearing) and Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 (protection of property) to the Convention.   Šečić v. Croatia (no. 40116/02) The applicant, Šemso Šečić, is a Croatian national who was born in 1963 and lives in Zagreb.   The case concerns the investigation by the Croatian authorities into Mr Šečić’s allegations that he had been a victim of a racist attack.   He relies on Articles 3 (prohibition of inhuman or degrading treatment), 8 (right to respect for private and family life) and 13 (right to an effective remedy) and Article 14 (prohibition of discrimination) in conjunction with Article 3.   Grande Oriente d’Italia di Palazzo Giustiniani v. Italy (No. 2) (no. 26740/02) The applicant society, Grande Oriente d’Italia di Palazzo Giustiniani, is an Italian Masonic association which groups together several lodges. It has been in existence since 1805 and is affiliated to Universal Freemasonry.   The case concerns the applicant society’s allegation that a regional law requiring candidates for nomination and appointment to public office at regional level to declare whether they are members of Masonic lodges is discriminatory and incompatible with their right to freedom of association.   The applicant society relies on Article 14 (prohibition of discrimination), taken together with Article 11 (freedom of assembly and association). It also relies on Article 11, taken separately, and Article 13 (right to an effective remedy).   Miholapa v. Latvia (no. 61655/00) The applicant, Raisa Miholapa, is a former national of the former Soviet Union and a “permanently resident non-citizen” of Latvia. She lives in Riga (Latvia).   She relies on Article 6   §   1 (right to a fair hearing).   A. and E. Riis v. Norway (no. 9042/04) The applicants are Amelia Riis and Einar Riis, two Norwegian nationals born in 1930 and 1922 respectively. Ms Riis lives in Oslo. Mr Riis died in May   2006.   They rely on Article 6 § 1 (right to a fair hearing within a reasonable time) and Article 13 (right to an effective remedy).   Gładczak v. Poland (no. 14255/02) Polakowski v. Poland (no. 4657/02) The applicants, Roman Gładczak and Krzysztof Polakowski, are Polish nationals who were born in 1961 and 1964 respectively. They live in Gdynia (Poland).   They rely on Article 5 § 3 (right to liberty and security).   Kontrová v. Slovakia (no. 7510/04) The applicant, Dana Kontrová, is a Slovakian national who was born in 1974 and lives in Michalovce (Slovakia). She was married with two children born in 1997 and 2001.   On 31 December 2002 Ms Kontrová’s husband shot dead their two children and then himself. The case concerns Ms Kontrová’s allegations that the police, aware of her husband’s abusive and threatening behaviour, had failed to take appropriate action to protect her children’s lives. She further complains that it was not possible for her to obtain compensation.   She relies on Article 2 (right to life), Article 8 (right to respect for private and family life), Article 13 (right to an effective remedy) and Article 6 (right to a fair hearing).   Grozdanoski v. “the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia” (no. 21510/03) The applicant, Nikola Grozdanoski, is a Macedonian national who was born in 1934 and lives in Ohrid (“the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia”).   He relies on Article 6 § 1 (right to a fair hearing).   Durmuş Kurt and Others v. Turkey (no. 12101/03) The applicants, Durmuş Kurt,   Nurettin Kılıçarslan, and Zübeyde Kayar, are Turkish nationals who were born in 1958, 1972 and 1970 respectively. At the time of the introduction of the application, they were living in Istanbul but are now living in Germany and Switzerland.   The case concerns the applicants’ allegations of ill-treatment in police custody following their arrest in June 1995 during a police anti-terrorist operation against an illegal organisation, the TKP-ML/TIKKO (Turkish Communist Party-Marxist-Leninist/Turkish Workers and Peasants’ Liberation Army).   They rely on Article 3 (prohibition of inhuman or degrading treatment), Article 6 § 1 (right to a fair trial) and Article 13 (right to an effective remedy).   Lizanets v. Ukraine (no. 6725/03) The applicant, Georgiy Ivanovych Lizanets, is a Ukrainian national who was born in 1945 and lives in Mukacheve (Ukraine).   He relies, in particular, on Article 6 § 1 (right to a fair hearing within a reasonable time).   Repetitive cases   Gianni and Others v. Italy (no. 35941/03)   Just satisfaction The applicants, nine Italian nationals who live in Villanova di Guidonia and Rome, were the owners of a plot of 6,398 square metres of building land in Rome. The administrative authorities occupied the land with a view to expropriating it and commenced building work. Since no formal expropriation order had been made and no compensation paid, the applicants brought an action for damages for the unlawful occupation of their land.   The applicants alleged that the occupation of their land had infringed their right to the peaceful enjoyment of their possessions as guaranteed by Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 (protection of property) to the Convention.   In a judgment of 30 March 2006 the Court held unanimously that there had been a violation of Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 and considered that the question of just satisfaction was not ready for decision.   Brazdă and Maliţa v. Romania (no. 75297/01) Horia Jean Ionescu v. Romania (no. 11116/02) The three applicants in these two cases are Romanian nationals.   They rely on Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 (protection of property).   Maria Peter and Others v. Romania (no. 54369/00) The applicants, Maria Peter, Laszlo Gereb, Ilona Zsombori, Lenke Margit Kristo and Andrei Peter, are Romanian nationals who live in Miercurea-Ciuc (Romania).   They rely on Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 (protection of property) and Article 6 § 1 (right to a fair hearing).   Söğüt v. Turkey (nos. 16593/03 and 16600/03) The applicants, Muhammed Fesih Söğüt and Zülfikar Söğüt, are Turkish nationals who live in 1976 and 1963 respectively and live in Batman (Turkey).   They rely on Article 6 § 1 (right to a fair hearing).       Length-of-proceedings cases   In the following cases, the applicants, relying on Article 6 § 1 (right to a fair hearing within a reasonable time), complain about the excessive length of (non-criminal) proceedings.   Riihikallio and Others v. Finland (no. 25072/02) Leonidopoulos v. Greece (no. 17930/05) Papasteriades v. Greece (no. 2189/05) Ispan v. Romania (no. 67710/01) Dika v. “the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia” (no. 13270/02) Mihajloski v. “the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia” (no. 44221/02) Stojanov v. “the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia” (no. 34215/02)   ***   Press contacts Emma Hellyer (telephone: 00 33 (0)3 90 21 42 15) Stéphanie Klein (telephone: 00 33 (0)3 88 41 21 54) Beverley Jacobs (telephone: 00 33 (0)3 90 21 54 21) Tracey Turner-Tretz (telephone : 00 33 (0)3 88 41 35 30)   The European Court of Human Rights was set up in Strasbourg by the Council of Europe Member States in 1959 to deal with alleged violations of the 1950 European Convention on Human Rights.