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.
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:
��������� Işıl Karakaş, President, ��������� Julia Laffranque, ��������� Paul Lemmens, ��������� Valeriu Griţco, ��������� Ksenija Turković, ��������� St�phanie Mourou-Vikstr�m, ��������� Georges Ravarani, judges, and Stanley Naismith, Section Registrar,
The case originated in an application (no. 64734/11 ) against the Republic of Estonia lodged with the Court under Article 34 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (�the Convention�) by four applicants, namely Ms K. Leuska (�the first applicant�), Mr A. Leuska (�the second applicant�), Ms P. Esop (�the third applicant�) and Ms K.-B. Esop (�the fourth applicant�). The first and second applicants were represented before the Court by Mr T. Keevallik and the third and fourth applicants by Mr E. Tonka, both lawyers practising in Tallinn.
The Estonian Government (�the Government�) were represented by their Agent, Ms M. Kuurberg, of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs.
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.