{"id":1013,"date":"2016-07-05T08:36:34","date_gmt":"2016-07-05T07:36:34","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/rcstaging.co.uk\/ehrac\/?post_type=case-studies&p=1013"},"modified":"2023-10-31T19:59:15","modified_gmt":"2023-10-31T19:59:15","slug":"lisnyy-and-others-v-ukraine-and-russia","status":"publish","type":"case-studies","link":"http:\/\/ehrac.org.uk\/en_gb\/key-ehrac-cases\/lisnyy-and-others-v-ukraine-and-russia\/","title":{"rendered":"Lisnyy and others v Ukraine and Russia"},"content":{"rendered":"\n\t\t
<\/div><\/div>
<\/div><\/div>
\n\t
\n\t\t
<\/div><\/div>\n\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\r\n
\r\n\t
\r\n\t\t

Case No. 5355\/15<\/strong>
\nJudgment date: 5 July\u00a02016<\/strong><\/p>\n

This case was brought by applicants who had been affected by the conflict in the Donetsk region of Ukraine from the beginning of April 2014 onwards, following the creation of the \u2018Donetsk and Lugansk People\u2019s Republics\u2019\u00a0by pro-Russian groups and the \u2018anti-terrorist\u2019 response by the Government of Ukraine.<\/p>\n

The homes of the applicants, Anton Lisnyy, Svetlana Piven and Volodymyr Anokhin, were either destroyed or damaged by shellfire. The applicants complained that their rights to life (Art. 2), a fair trial (Art. 6(1)), respect for family and private life (Art. 8), freedom of expression (Art. 10) and an effective remedy (Art. 13) of the ECHR were impossible to guarantee since all State institutions in eastern Ukraine had been relocated to areas controlled by the Ukrainian Government. The applicants further claimed a violation of Art. 1 of Protocol 1 ECHR with regards to the destruction of their property.<\/p>\n

Read the full case summary in the Winter 2016 Bulletin.<\/a><\/p>\n

\n

Links<\/h3>\n