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.
The European Court of Human Rights (Grand Chamber), sitting as a Grand Chamber composed of:
��������� Guido Raimondi, President , ��������� Angelika Nu�berger, ��������� Linos-Alexandre Sicilianos, ��������� Ganna Yudkivska, ��������� Robert Spano, ��������� Ledi Bianku, ��������� Andr� Potocki, ��������� Ale� Pejchal, ��������� Faris Vehabović, ��������� Dmitry Dedov, ��������� Armen Harutyunyan, ��������� Georges Ravarani, ��������� Pauliine Koskelo, ��������� Tim Eicke, ��������� Jolien Schukking, ��������� P�ter Paczolay, ��������� Lado Chanturia, judges , and S�ren Prebensen, Deputy Grand Chamber Registrar ,
The case originated in five applications (nos. 29580/12 , 36847/12, 11252/13, 12317/13 and 43746/14) against the Russian Federation lodged with the Court under Article 34 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (�the Convention�) by a Russian national, Mr Aleksey Anatolyevich Navalnyy (�the applicant�), on 14 May 2012, 28 May 2012, 30 November 2012, 14 January 2013 and 6 June 2014 respectively.
The applicant was represented by Ms O. Mikhaylova, Mr K. Terekhov, Ms A. Maralyan and Ms K. Moskalenko, lawyers practising in Moscow. The Russian Government (�the Government�) were represented initially by Mr G. Matyushkin, the Representative of the Russian Federation to the European Court of Human Rights, and then by his successor in that office, Mr M. Galperin.
The applicant complained that his arrest at public events on seven occasions had violated his right to freedom of peaceful assembly and right to liberty. He also alleged that his arrest, detention and the administrative charges brought against him had pursued the aim of undermining his right to freedom of assembly, for political reasons. Finally, he alleged that the administrative proceedings before the domestic courts had fallen short of the guarantees of a fair hearing.
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.