E.B. v. ROMANIA - 49089/10 (Judgment : Article 3 - Prohibition of torture : Fourth Section Committee) [2019] ECHR 222 (19 March 2019)

E.B. v. ROMANIA - 49089/10 (Judgment : Article 3 - Prohibition of torture : Fourth Section Committee) [2019] ECHR 222 (19 March 2019)

The authorities failed to conduct a context-sensitive investigation into the applicant's rape allegations, did not consider her intellectual disability or vulnerability, placed undue emphasis on the absence of physical resistance, and failed to provide her with information, legal assistance, or protection as required by domestic and international law, thereby breaching their positive obligations under Articles 3 and 8 of the Convention.

Citation
[2019] ECHR 222
Parties
Applicant: E. B.; Respondent: Romania
Jurisdiction
European Union
Judgment Date
19 March 2019
Procedural Posture
Application Under Article 34 of the European Convention on Human Rights / Judgment on Merits and Just Satisfaction
Outcome
Violation of Articles 3 and 8 of the Convention found; just satisfaction awarded to applicant.
Legal Topics
Rape, Sexual Violence, Rights of Victims, State Positive Obligations, Protection of Vulnerable Persons, Right to Private Life, Prohibition of Inhuman or Degrading Treatment
Human Rights Law Criminal Law Rape Sexual Violence Rights of Victims State Positive Obligations Protection of Vulnerable Persons Right to Private Life +1 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

E. B.

Applicant

Romania

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Application Under Article 34 of the European Convention on Human Rights / Judgment on Merits and Just Satisfaction

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Romanian authorities failed to effectively investigate allegations of rape and protect the applicant's rights as a vulnerable victim under Articles 3 and 8 of the Convention

Ratio Decidendi

The authorities failed to conduct a context-sensitive investigation into the applicant's rape allegations, did not consider her intellectual disability or vulnerability, placed undue emphasis on the absence of physical resistance, and failed to provide her with information, legal assistance, or protection as required by domestic and international law, thereby breaching their positive obligations under Articles 3 and 8 of the Convention.

Court Disposition

Violation of Articles 3 and 8 of the Convention found; just satisfaction awarded to applicant.

Orders

  • Respondent State to pay applicant EUR 12,000 for non-pecuniary damage.
  • Respondent State to pay applicant EUR 1,400 for costs and expenses.