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 (Former Third Section), sitting as a Chamber composed of:
��������� Luis L�pez Guerra, President, ��������� Kristina Pardalos, ��������� Helen Keller, ��������� Helena J�derblom, ��������� Valeriu Griţco, ��������� Iulia Motoc, ��������� Branko Lubarda, judges, and Fatoş Aracı, Deputy Section Registrar ,
The case originated in an application (no. 7901/02 ) against Romania lodged with the Court under Article 34 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (�the Convention�) by three Romanian nationals, Mr Mircea Dumitru Grigore Hagiescu, Mr Andrei-Grigore Alexandrescu and Ms Domnica-Suzana Manicatide (�the applicants�), on 29 January 2002.
. In a judgment delivered on 13 November 2008 (�the principal judgment�), the Court held that there has been a violation of Article 6 � 1 of the Convention and of Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 as a result of the infringement of their right of access to a court and the failure by the authorities to strike a fair balance between the public interest on the one hand and the applicants� property right on the other (see Hagiescu and Others v. Romania , no. 7901/02 , 13 November 2008). The Court reserved the question of the application of Article 41 of the Convention as it was not ready for decision.
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.