Judgement 47052/18

Applicant name GOLOVIN 
Applicant type Natural person
Number of applicants 1
Country Ukraine
Application no. 47052/18
Date 13/07/2023
Judges Georges Ravarani, President,
 Lado Chanturia,
 Carlo Ranzoni,
 María Elósegui,
 Mattias Guyomar,
 Kateřina Šimáčková,
 Mykola Gnatovskyy
Institution Court
Type Judgment
Outcome Art. 8 Violation
Reason Quality of law
Type of privacy Private life; Economic privacy; procedual privacy
Keywords Dismissal office
Facts of the caseA judge of the Constitutional Court of Ukraine is dismissed from office, which the Ukrainian supreme court had found legitimate. Applicant invokes Articles 6, 8 and 18 ECHR.
AnalysisThe ECtHR find that the supreme court, while making a general statement about the constitutional court being primarily a political body, did not comment on how that applied specifically in the applicant’s case, given that he had been dismissed specifically for breach of his judicial oath. In a previous case, the ECtHR had already concluded that the legal framework concerning constitutional court judges was not reasonably foreseeable. As the legal framework in issue is identical in the present case, the Court concludes that the framework in question lacked the requisite clarity and foreseeability and that the domestic decisions applying it in the applicant’s case were not sufficiently reasoned. Thus, there had been a violation of Article 8 of the Convention, and Article 6 ECHR. The Court does not find it necessary to examine the complaint under Article 13 ECHR, and finds that the complaint under Article 18 ECHR is manifestly ill-founded.
Other Article violation? Yes, article 6 ECHR; No Article 13 ECHR.
Damage awarded Holds that the finding of a violation is sufficient just satisfaction for any non-pecuniary damage suffered by the applicant and dismisses the applicant’s claim for just satisfaction.
Documents Judgment