Council of Europe: European Court of Human Rights
The Court is currently made up of 47 judges, one in principle for every State signed up to the Convention. They are elected by the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe and serve for six years. Judges sit on the Court as individuals and do not represent their country. Website: www.echr.coe.int/Pages/home.aspx?p=home
- Appeal / Right to appeal 1
- Arbitrary arrest and detention 2
- Combatants / Former combatants 5
- Deportation / Forcible return 7
- Derivative status 1
- Discrimination based on race, nationality, ethnicity 1
- Effective remedy 1
- Expulsion 2
- Family reunification 2
- Freedom from torture, inhuman and degrading treatment 8
- Freedom of expression 2
- Freedom of speech 2
- Immigration law 1
- Legal representation / Legal aid 1
- Lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and intersex (LGBTI) 1
- Palestinian 1
- Persecution based on political opinion 6
- Persecution of family members 1
- Persecution on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity 1
- Prevention of discrimination 2
- Prison or detention conditions 1
- Regional instruments 1
- Rejected asylum-seekers 5
- Religious discrimination 1
- Residence permits / Residency 1
- Right to family life 5
- Right to liberty and security 1
- Social group discrimination 1
- Statelessness 1
- Tamil 5
- Terrorism 1
- Visas 1
- Withdrawal of nationality 1
|
Adam JOHANSEN against Denmark, Application no. 27801/19
1 February 2022 | Judicial Body: Council of Europe: European Court of Human Rights | Document type: Case Law | Legal Instrument: 1950 European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) | Topic(s): Terrorism - Withdrawal of nationality | Countries: Denmark - Syrian Arab Republic - Tunisia |
|
CASE OF ABDI v. DENMARK (Application no. 41643/19)
The case concerns the Danish authorities’ decision in 2018 to expel the applicant, with a permanent ban on his re-entry to the country, following his conviction for possession of a firearm. Relying on Article 8 (right to respect for private and family life) of the European Convention, the applicant submits that, in their decisions, the Danish courts failed to weigh in the balance that he did not have a significant criminal past, that he had never been issued with a warning that he might be expelled, and that he had strong ties to Denmark where he has lived with his family since he was four years old. 14 September 2021 | Judicial Body: Council of Europe: European Court of Human Rights | Document type: Case Law | Topic(s): Expulsion | Countries: Denmark - Somalia |
|
M.A. v. Denmark
194. Having regard to all the above considerations, the Court is not satisfied, notwithstanding their margin of appreciation, that the authorities of the respondent State, when subjecting the applicant to a three-year waiting period before he could apply for family reunification with his wife, struck a fair balance between, on the one hand, the applicant’s interest in being reunited with his wife in Denmark and, on the other, the interest of the community as a whole to control immigration with a view to protect the economic well-being of the country, to ensure the effective integration of those granted protection and to preserve social cohesion (see paragraph 165 above). 195. It follows that there has been a violation of Article 8 of the Convention. 9 July 2021 | Judicial Body: Council of Europe: European Court of Human Rights | Document type: Case Law | Topic(s): Family reunification | Countries: Denmark - Syrian Arab Republic |
|
Biao v. Denmark (Grand Chamber)
24 May 2016 | Judicial Body: Council of Europe: European Court of Human Rights | Document type: Case Law | Topic(s): Prevention of discrimination - Right to family life | Countries: Denmark - Ghana - Togo |
|
M.E. v. Denmark
8 July 2014 | Judicial Body: Council of Europe: European Court of Human Rights | Document type: Case Law | Topic(s): Expulsion - Freedom from torture, inhuman and degrading treatment - Palestinian - Right to family life - Statelessness | Countries: Denmark - Syrian Arab Republic |
|
Biao v. Denmark (Second Section)
25 March 2014 | Judicial Body: Council of Europe: European Court of Human Rights | Document type: Case Law | Legal Instrument: 1950 European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) | Topic(s): Prevention of discrimination - Right to family life | Countries: Denmark - Ghana - Togo |
|
Fact sheet - Hate Speech
February 2012 | Publisher: Council of Europe: European Court of Human Rights | Document type: Case Law Compilations/Analyses |
|
Osman v. Denmark
14 June 2011 | Judicial Body: Council of Europe: European Court of Human Rights | Document type: Case Law | Legal Instrument: 1950 European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) | Topic(s): Freedom from torture, inhuman and degrading treatment - Right to family life | Countries: Denmark - Somalia |
|
T.N. and S.N. v. Denmark
20 January 2011 | Judicial Body: Council of Europe: European Court of Human Rights | Document type: Case Law | Topic(s): Combatants / Former combatants - Deportation / Forcible return - Freedom from torture, inhuman and degrading treatment - Persecution based on political opinion - Rejected asylum-seekers - Tamil | Countries: Denmark - Sri Lanka |
|
T.N. v. Denmark
20 January 2011 | Judicial Body: Council of Europe: European Court of Human Rights | Document type: Case Law | Topic(s): Combatants / Former combatants - Deportation / Forcible return - Freedom from torture, inhuman and degrading treatment - Persecution based on political opinion - Rejected asylum-seekers - Tamil | Countries: Denmark - Sri Lanka |
