SOROKIN AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA - 73825/13 (Article 11 - Freedom of assembly and association : Fourth Section Committee) [2024] ECHR 593 (27 June 2024)

SOROKIN AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA - 73825/13 (Article 11 - Freedom of assembly and association : Fourth Section Committee) [2024] ECHR 593 (27 June 2024)

The restrictions imposed on the applicants' freedom of assembly were either based on legal provisions that did not meet the Convention's 'quality of law' requirements or were not necessary in a democratic society, thus constituting a violation of Article 11.

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2024] ECHR 593
Parties
Applicants: Sergey Vladimirovich Sorokin and Others; Respondent: Russian Government
Jurisdiction
European Union
Judgment Date
27 June 2024
Procedural Posture
Applications Under Article 34 of the European Convention on Human Rights / Judgment After Written Procedure, Joined Applications
Outcome
Violation of Article 11 found; no separate examination of Article 13; finding of violation constitutes sufficient just satisfaction.
Legal Topics
Freedom of Assembly, Freedom of Expression, Right to Effective Remedy
Human Rights Law Constitutional Law Freedom of Assembly Freedom of Expression Right to Effective Remedy

Source-derived case record

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 3 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Sergey Vladimirovich Sorokin and Others

Applicants

Russian Government

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Applications Under Article 34 of the European Convention on Human Rights / Judgment After Written Procedure, Joined Applications

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether restrictions on the location, time, or manner of conduct of public events violated Article 11 of the Convention
  2. 2 Whether there was a lack of effective domestic remedy in violation of Article 13

Ratio Decidendi

The restrictions imposed on the applicants' freedom of assembly were either based on legal provisions that did not meet the Convention's 'quality of law' requirements or were not necessary in a democratic society, thus constituting a violation of Article 11.

Court Disposition

Violation of Article 11 found; no separate examination of Article 13; finding of violation constitutes sufficient just satisfaction.

Orders

  • Applications joined.
  • Court has jurisdiction as facts predate Russia's withdrawal from the Convention.