CEDH · PRESS;CHAMBERJUDGMENTS;ENG — 31 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 } .s7ED160F0 { text-decoration:none } .s33165EBA { font-family:Arial; font-size:8pt; vertical-align:super; color:#0069d6 } .s4DDA3AA3 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; font-style:italic } .s2F0C8308 { font-family:Arial; background-color:#00ffff } .sCB9E0544 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:left } .sADADF4A7 { font-family:Arial; text-decoration:underline } .sC7EAD8B { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; text-decoration:underline } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .sF6A12959 { width:33%; height:1px; text-align:left } .s2EB42ED2 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:10pt } .s653E6C45 { font-family:Arial; font-size:6.67pt; vertical-align:super; color:#0069d6 } EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS   [No.] 31.05.2007   Press release issued by the Registrar   CHAMBER JUDGMENT GRANDE ORIENTE D`ITALIA DI PALAZZO GIUSTINIANI v. ITALY (N° 2)   The European Court of Human Rights has today notified in writing its Chamber judgment [1] in the case of Grande Oriente d’Italia di Palazzo Giustiniani v. Italy (n° 2) (application no. 26740/02).   The Court held by six votes to one that there had been a violation of Article 14 of the European Convention on Human Rights combined with Article 11 (freedom of assembly and association).   Under Article 41 (just satisfaction) of the Convention, the Court awarded the applicant [Click and type Amount e.g. 3,000] euros (EUR) for pecuniary and non-pecuniary damage and EUR [Click and type Amount] for costs and expenses. ]   (The judgment is available only in French.)   1.     Principal facts   The applicant,   Grande Oriente D’Italia di Palazzo Giustiniani, is an Italian national who was born in [Click and type Date of Birth] and lives in [Click and type City].   [Insert facts from a previous press release if there was one.]   2.     Procedure and composition of the Court   The application was lodged on 7 June 2000.   Judgment was given by a Chamber of 7 judges, composed as follows:   Christos Rozakis (Greek), President , Elisabeth Steiner (Austrian), Khanlar Hajiyev (Azerbaijani), Dean Spielmann (Luxemburger), Sverre Erik Jebens (Norwegian), Giorgio Malinverni (Swiss), judges , Annalisa Ciampi (Italian) , ad hoc judge , and also Søren Nielsen , Section Registrar .   3.     Summary of the judgment [2]   Complaints   The applicant complained, under [Click and select Code e.g. 8t] of the European Convention on Human Rights, that [Click and type Complaint(s)].   Decision of the Court   Article [Click and type Number] of the Convention   [Click and summarise Reasoning]   Article [Click and type Number] of the Convention   [Click and summarise Reasoning]       ***   The Court’s judgments are accessible on its Internet site ( http://www.echr.coe.int ).   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.   [1] Under Article 43 of the Convention, within three months from the date of a Chamber judgment, any party to the case may, in exceptional cases, request that the case be referred to the 17 ‑ member Grand Chamber of the Court. In that event, a panel of five judges considers whether the case raises a serious question affecting the interpretation or application of the Convention or its protocols, or a serious issue of general importance, in which case the Grand Chamber will deliver a final judgment. If no such question or issue arises, the panel will reject the request, at which point the judgment becomes final. Otherwise Chamber judgments become final on the expiry of the three-month period or earlier if the parties declare that they do not intend to make a request to refer. [2] This summary by the Registry does not bind the Court.