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 41 • Just satisfaction • Awards for pecuniary and non-pecuniary damage sustained from violation of Art 1 P1 on account of the respondent State's failure to comply with its positive obligation to protect the applicant from fraudulent takeover of his company, its shares and assets, by a private party • Amount of pecuniary damages decided in equity on account of inherently uncertain character of damage flowing from the violation
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 (Third Section), sitting as a Chamber composed of:
Pere Pastor Vilanova , President , Jolien Schukking, Yonko Grozev, Georgios A. Serghides, Peeter Roosma, Ioannis Ktistakis, Andreas Zünd , judges , and Milan Blaško, Section Registrar,
The case concerns the adequacy of the domestic authorities' reaction to a criminal encroachment upon the applicant's "possessions", namely third parties fraudulently taking control of the applicant's company and of assets of that company. The case raised issues relating to the positive obligations of the Bulgarian State under Article 1 of Protocol No. 1.
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.