SIDE BY SIDE INTERNATIONAL FILM FESTIVAL AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA - 32678/18 (Positive obligations - Freedom of expression - Authorities' years-long failure to secure safe and uninterrupted conduct of annual international LGBT film festival organised by the applicant company - Remainder inadmissible : Third Section) [2024] ECHR 903 (17 December 2024)
The State failed to discharge its positive obligations under Article 10 by not taking comprehensive and effective action to prevent repeated disruptions of the LGBT film festival, including bomb threats and false alarms, resulting in a violation of the applicant company's freedom of expression.
- Citation
- [2024] ECHR 903
- Parties
- Applicant Company: Side by Side International Film Festival OOO; Second Applicant: Gulnara Sultanova; Third Applicant: Andrey Petrov; Respondent Government: Russian Federation
- Jurisdiction
- European Union
- Judgment Date
- 17 December 2024
- Procedural Posture
- Application to the European Court of Human Rights / Judgment After Full Hearing
- Outcome
- Violation of Article 10 found; complaint under Article 10 by applicant company admissible; complaints by second and third applicants inadmissible; no need to examine Article 14 separately; just satisfaction awarded.
- Legal Topics
- Freedom of Expression, Positive Obligations, Discrimination, LGBT Rights, Police Inaction, Public Safety, COVID 19 Restrictions
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Side by Side International Film Festival OOO
Applicant Company
Gulnara Sultanova
Second Applicant
Andrey Petrov
Third Applicant
Russian Federation
Respondent Government
Procedural Posture
Application to the European Court of Human Rights / Judgment After Full Hearing
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the State failed to comply with its positive obligations under Article 10 to protect freedom of expression by not securing the safe and uninterrupted conduct of the LGBT film festival.
- 2 Whether the authorities' actions or inactions in response to repeated bomb threats and disruptions constituted a violation of Article 10.
- 3 Whether the suspension of the festival in 2020 under COVID-19 measures was justified and proportionate.
Ratio Decidendi
The State failed to discharge its positive obligations under Article 10 by not taking comprehensive and effective action to prevent repeated disruptions of the LGBT film festival, including bomb threats and false alarms, resulting in a violation of the applicant company's freedom of expression.
Court Disposition
Violation of Article 10 found; complaint under Article 10 by applicant company admissible; complaints by second and third applicants inadmissible; no need to examine Article 14 separately; just satisfaction awarded.
Orders
- The respondent State is to pay the applicant company EUR 7,500 in respect of non-pecuniary damage, plus any tax that may be chargeable, within three months from the date the judgment becomes final, to be converted into the currency of the respondent State at the rate applicable at the date of settlement.
- From the expiry of three months until settlement, simple interest shall be payable on the above amount at a rate equal to the marginal lending rate of the European Central Bank during the default period plus three percentage points.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment