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 (Second Section), sitting as a Committee composed of:
��������� Arnfinn B�rdsen, President, ��������� Valeriu Griţco, ��������� Peeter Roosma, judges, and Hasan Bakırcı, Deputy Section Registrar,
The case originated in an application (no. 12918/12 ) against the Republic of Moldova lodged with the Court under Article 34 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (�the Convention�) on 23 December 2011 by a company incorporated in Moldova, Electronservice-Nord S.A. (�the applicant company�).
In a judgment delivered on 2 July 2019 (�the principal judgment�), the Court held there had been a violation of Article 6 � 1 of the Convention and of Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 to the Convention ( Electronservice-Nord S.A. v. the Republic of Moldova, no. 12918/12 , 2 July 2019).
Since the question of the application of Article 41 of the Convention was not ready for decision as regards pecuniary damage, the Court reserved it and invited the Government and the applicant company to submit, within three months, their written observations on that issue and, in particular, to notify the Court of any agreement they might reach (ibid., � 35 and point 5 of the operative provisions).
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.