Generate a structured brief — facts, issues, held, reasoning, and significance — for this case in seconds. Or browse the verbatim judgment via the source links below.
Art 6 § 1 (civil) • Adversarial trial • Inability of applicants to put questions to court-appointed experts, not a breach of their right to participate effectively in proceedings • Issue accentuated before trial court concentrated on specialised and technical area of law and not a particular aspect of applicants' personal rights at stake Art 6 § 1 (civil) • Non-communication of documents assessed and relied on to a large extent by court-appointed experts, impaired applicants' right to adversarial proceedings • Opportunity to consult a case file not, of itself, a sufficient safeguard
This judgment will become final in the circumstances set out in Article 44 § 2 of the Convention. It may be subject to editorial revision.
The European Court of Human Rights (Second Section), sitting as a Chamber composed of:
Arnfinn Bårdsen , President , Egidijus Kūris, Pauliine Koskelo, Saadet Yüksel, Lorraine Schembri Orland, Frédéric Krenc, Diana Sârcu , judges , and Dorothee von Arnim, Deputy Section Registrar,
the application (no. 48173/18 ) against the Republic of Türkiye lodged with the Court under Article 34 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms ("the Convention") by six Turkish nationals ("the applicants") indicated in the appended table, on 17 September 2018;
Auto-extracted from BAILII. Full structured brief in progress — the source links below give you the verbatim judgment in the meantime.
Multiple official and mirror sources — pick whichever loads cleanly on your network.
Common Room
0 comments · About the Common Room →
No comments yet — start the discussion.
Voted-best comments help future students and feed Caselaw's AI study tools.