Costas & Thomas ORPHANOU & Ors v Turkey - 43422/04 [2009] ECHR 2083 (1 December 2009)

Costas & Thomas ORPHANOU & Ors v Turkey - 43422/04 [2009] ECHR 2083 (1 December 2009)

The applications were introduced out of time, as there was no evidence of any ongoing or concrete investigative progress post-1990 that could justify the delay of fourteen years or more in bringing the cases to the Court. Accordingly, the applications must be rejected as inadmissible under Article 35 §§ 1 and 4 of the Convention.

Citation
[2009] ECHR 2083
Parties
Applicants: Costas & Thomas Orphanou and others (see annexed table); Respondent: Turkey
Jurisdiction
European Union
Judgment Date
01 December 2009
Procedural Posture
Application to the European Court of Human Rights / Decision on Admissibility
Outcome
Applications declared inadmissible as out of time.
Legal Topics
Enforced Disappearance, Right to Life, Right to Liberty and Security, Right to a Fair Trial, Right to Respect for Private and Family Life, Right to an Effective Remedy, Admissibility Criteria, Six Month Rule
Human Rights Law International Law Enforced Disappearance Right to Life Right to Liberty and Security Right to a Fair Trial Right to Respect for Private and Family Life Right to an Effective Remedy +2 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 3 Authorities cited 14 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Costas & Thomas Orphanou and others (see annexed table)

Applicants

Turkey

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Application to the European Court of Human Rights / Decision on Admissibility

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applications were lodged within the six-month time limit under Article 35 § 1 of the Convention
  2. 2 Whether there was any ongoing, concrete advance in investigations post-1990 to justify delay in applying to the Court

Ratio Decidendi

The applications were introduced out of time, as there was no evidence of any ongoing or concrete investigative progress post-1990 that could justify the delay of fourteen years or more in bringing the cases to the Court. Accordingly, the applications must be rejected as inadmissible under Article 35 §§ 1 and 4 of the Convention.

Court Disposition

Applications declared inadmissible as out of time.

Orders

  • Applications joined.
  • Applications declared inadmissible.