ECtHR Cases

Application no. 22760/25

This case concerns legal certainty surrounding entry into a home for the purpose of arresting a person staying irregularly and placing that person in administrative detention. In the absence of specific statutory rules governing such home entries, the gap has largely been filled by the case-law of the Court of Cassation. In its judgments of 5 October 2022 and 10 October 2023, that court had required prior written authorisation.

In the Jeblaoui case, however, the Court of Cassation gave a different interpretation on 22 April 2025, narrowing the scope of that safeguard: police officers could enter the home on the basis of oral consent in order to explain their presence and to check whether written authorisation could then be obtained before carrying out their task.

The case therefore raises, under Article 8 of the Convention, the fundamental question whether a legal framework built by case-law remains sufficiently accessible and foreseeable when that case-law is substantially changed a few years later. The Court must also determine whether the applicant waived the protection of his home unequivocally, on the basis of informed consent given without coercion.

The case has been communicated by the European Court of Human Rights to the Belgian State. The written procedure has closed and a judgment is awaited.

Status Pending; judgment awaited.

Walloon subsoil resources and the right to property

Last week, we lodged an application with the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg on behalf of two property owners in the former Vieille Montagne mining basin and of BiHU ASBL. The case is thus pending before the European Court.

The case had been brought before the Constitutional Court by Professor Michel Delnoy and his team (Liège). In its judgment no. 68/2026 of 28 May 2026, the Constitutional Court dismissed the action brought against the Walloon Decree of 14 March 2024 on the subsoil.

Where does the problem lie? The Civil Code (Art. 3.63) provides that ownership extends as deep as is useful to the owner, having regard to the intended use and the situation of the land. The Walloon decree, by contrast, works with fixed depths: beyond a depth of 100 metres, a public-utility easement arises automatically in favour of the holder of the exclusive permit, without any specific procedure. Two criteria for the same subsoil, and no provision says how a conflict between them is to be resolved.

The Constitutional Court itself acknowledged that there are cases, described as rare, in which owners use their land beyond a depth of 100 metres and may thus come into conflict with an authorised operation. For them, it remains uncertain what place their use will be given, through which procedure they will be able to assert it and what compensation will apply if they have to give way. This concerns, in particular, water supply from a former mine and geothermal energy.

On behalf of the applicants, we allege a violation of Article 6 § 1 of the Convention, Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 and Article 14 of the Convention.

The domestic proceedings are closed. The European proceedings have begun.

Status Pending before the Court.

Application no. 21464/26

A young Ghanaian woman who survived human trafficking and subsequently suffered targeted homophobic violence faces removal to Ghana. The application concerns the assessment of the real and individual risk she would face upon return and the weight given to her particular vulnerability and the independent medical evidence documenting her trauma. It raises complaints under Articles 3 and 13 of the Convention.

Status Pending before the Court.

Application no. 26317/26

A young Ghanaian woman who was subjected to domestic slavery and later became trapped in an international forced-prostitution network faces removal to Ghana. The application concerns the risk of re-trafficking and revictimisation, the absence of effective protection upon return and the treatment of the medical evidence documenting her severe trauma. It raises complaints under Articles 3 and 13 of the Convention.

Status Pending before the Court.

Application no. 21462/26

A Ghanaian woman who fled persecution connected with forced marriage, gender-based violence and her sexual orientation faces removal to Ghana. The application concerns the specific risks she would face upon return and the assessment of independent medical evidence documenting complex post-traumatic stress disorder and severe physical trauma. It raises complaints under Articles 3 and 13 of the Convention.

Status Pending before the Court.

Parental authority, interim measures and private international law

This case concerns a complex and exceptionally lengthy set of proceedings relating to parental authority and measures affecting the applicant’s relationship with his children. The proceedings lasted from 21 November 2014 until the judgment of the French Court of Cassation of 10 June 2026, a period of more than eleven years.

The application before the European Court of Human Rights raises, in particular, issues under Article 8 of the Convention, concerning respect for family life and the positive obligations of the State in proceedings involving children and parental authority. It also raises questions concerning the effectiveness and timeliness of judicial protection, including the handling of interim measures.

Status Application lodged before the European Court of Human Rights.

Applications nos. 18255/10 and 5 others – Chamber judgment

Zouhaier Chihaoui – Representative of the Human Rights Litigation Foundation (HRLF) – Third-party intervention before the European Court of Human Rights.

Conditions in which prisoners were transported by road and rail in Russia: violation of the prohibition of inhuman and degrading treatment (Article 3) and of the right to an effective remedy (Article 13 taken together with Article 3). The Court had sought the parties’ views on the existence of a systemic problem. In its written submissions on that question, the HRLF argued that prisoner transfers were a persistent and recurrent problem stemming from a widespread practice and from deficiencies in the legislation. Under Article 46, the Court found a recurrent structural problem and held that Russia was to make available, within eighteen months, a combination of effective domestic remedies with both preventive and compensatory effects.

Application no. 21786/15 – Chamber judgment

Zouhaier Chihaoui – Representative of the Human Rights Litigation Foundation (HRLF) – Third-party intervention before the European Court of Human Rights.

Length of the applicant’s detention on remand: violation of the right to liberty and security (Article 5 § 3). The Court had informed the parties that it was considering applying the pilot-judgment procedure. The HRLF intervened jointly with the Hungarian Helsinki Committee, arguing that the extension of pre-trial detention in Hungary was a systemic problem rooted in the practice of the domestic courts and in deficiencies in the legislation. The Court did not find it necessary to engage in a pilot-judgment procedure at that stage, while stating that it might reassess that need should the Government’s efforts prove insufficient.