Actual problems of the non-pecuniary damages’ assessment by the European Court of Human Rights

The article is devoted to the awarding of non-pecuniary damages in the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) practice. The problem of research arises from the lack of criteria that the Court uses for calculating non-pecuniary damages which leads to unfair compensation for the injured party. The article examines ECHR cases and investigates how the Court has substantiated the precondition for a claim for compensation of non-pecuniary damage of a person. The grounds and circumstances which influence the amount of non-pecuniary damages are analyzed. The research proposes to define and introduce a list of criteria based on individual features of a person in recommendations on which ECHR should pay attention in non-pecuniary damages assessment to provide fair compensation to the victim which can help to create transparent mechanism for assessment in its practice

Download Full-text

Recusatio iudicus: Serbian scope, comparative review and practice of European Court of Human Rights

Strani pravni zivot ◽

10.5937/spz64-28056 ◽

2020 ◽

pp. 137-150

Author(s):

Krsto Pejović

Keyword(s):

Human Rights ◽

Legal Framework ◽

European Convention ◽

European Court ◽

Comparative Review ◽

Compensation Claim ◽

Injured Party ◽

Legal Frameworks ◽

The Right ◽

Procedure Codes

The right of a party to exercise a judicial function in a case deciding its rights and obligations is impartial to a judge, which is determined by the obligation of the state to provide, first in a normative and then in a practical framework, the right to be upheld. Prima faciae, when it comes to the Serbian and legal frameworks of surrounding countries, it has been done nomotechnically in an impeccable way, but there are a number of essential shortcomings. The results we have obtained, using comparative legal review and analyzing practice of ECHR indicate that the Serbian, as well as the legislatures in the region, faces major problems in this area. As an anomaly we identified the possibility that a judge, although biased, in accordance with applicable regulations (in Serbian, Croatian and North Macedonian legal framework), could exercise judicial function in the case (because, there Criminal procedure codes stipulates that judge "can" be disqualified if there are doubts in his impartiality). Furthermore, very big problem in all legislatures (except Montenegrin) was that the injured party, although entitled to make a compensation claim (and this claim, within the meaning of Article 6(1) of the European Convention constitutes a civil claim), has no opportunity to seek a judicial excption/recusation. Finally, all analyzed legislation, except the Slovenian, allows a judge to take immediate action when it comes to an optional recusation. Disagreeing with this, we suggested that in the future they follow their Slovenian colleague who arranged it in a much better way.

Download Full-text

Case of Georgia v. Russia (I) (Just Satisfaction)

The American Journal of International Law ◽

10.1017/ajil.2019.30 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 113 (3) ◽

pp. 581-586

Author(s):

Yulia Ioffe

Keyword(s):

Human Rights ◽

Russian Federation ◽

European Convention ◽

Financial Compensation ◽

European Court ◽

Fair Compensation ◽

The Russian Federation ◽

Grand Chamber

In Georgia v. Russia (I) (Just Satisfaction), the Grand Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR or Court) ordered the Russian Federation to pay Georgia EUR 10 million as reparation for Russia's “coordinated policy of arresting, detaining and expelling Georgian nationals” in the autumn of 2006 (paras. 51, 80). In so doing, the Court reaffirmed its position from Cyprus v. Turkey (IV) (Just Satisfaction) that financial compensation for non-pecuniary damage can be awarded in interstate cases. Although Georgia v. Russia (I) (Just Satisfaction) marks the development of a new line of ECtHR jurisprudence, it is unlikely that the decision will effectively prevent further mass violations of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR or Convention) by the states parties or offer fair compensation to the victims of such violations.

Download Full-text