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 (Fourth Section), sitting as a Committee composed of:
��������� Tim Eicke, President , ��������� Faris Vehabović, ��������� Pere Pastor Vilanova , judges , and Ilse Freiwirth, Deputy Section Registrar ,
1.  The case originated in an application (no. 50609/10 ) against the Republic of Armenia lodged with the Court under Article 34 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (�the Convention�) on 23 August 2010 by an Armenian national, Ms Emma Kirakosyan (�the applicant�).
2.  In a judgment delivered on 22 June 2021 (�the principal judgment�), the Court held that there had been a violation of Article 6 � 1 of the Convention and of Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 to the Convention on account of the domestic authorities� failure to implement a final judgment ordering the demolition of an unauthorised construction hindering the applicant�s property ( Kirakosyan v. Armenia [CTE], no. 50609/10 , 22 June 2021).
3.  Under Article 41 of the Convention the applicant sought just satisfaction of 7,670 euros (EUR) in respect of pecuniary damage suffered as a result of the decrease in the market value of her property because of the incomplete demolition of the unauthorised construction at issue. She also sought EUR 5,000 in respect of non-pecuniary damage and EUR 3,702 for costs and expenses (see �� 73, 76 and 79 of the principal judgment).
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.