Judgment 28377/11

Applicant name KARATAY
Applicant type natural person (prisoner)
Number of applicants 1
Application no. 28377/11
Judges Pauliine Koskelo, President,
 Lorraine Schembri Orland,
 Davor Derenčinović
Institution Court
Type Judgment
Outcome Art. 8 Violation
Reason Not necessary (prevention of crime and disorder)
Type of privacy informational privacy
Keywords Suveillance correspondence
Facts of the case The applicant also raised a complaint under Article 8 of the Convention concerning the opening and inspection, by the prison authorities, of his letter to his lawyer. He stated that his letter concerning the present application was forwarded to his lawyer on 6 April 2011 by the prison administration which had stamped each page of it as “seen”. This complaint is covered by the well‑established case-law of the Court. Having examined all the material before it, the Court concludes that it discloses a violation of Article 8 of the Convention in the light of its findings in its previous judgments (see, in particular, Eylem Kaya v. Turkey, no. 26623/07, §§ 24-49, 13 December 201
Analysis Mini-judgment
Other Article violation? No violation 6 or 11 ECHR or P1-3
Damage awarded a) that the respondent State is to pay the applicant, within three months, the following amounts, to be converted into the currency of the respondent State at the rate applicable at the date of settlement:
(i) EUR 300 (three hundred euros), plus any tax that may be chargeable, in respect of non-pecuniary damage;
(ii) EUR 1,500 (one thousand five hundred euros), plus any tax that may be chargeable to the applicant, in respect of costs and expenses;
Documents Judgment