VALENTYN IVANOV v. UKRAINE - 9021/11 (Judgment : Right to a fair trial : Fifth Section Committee) [2021] ECHR 253 (25 March 2021)

VALENTYN IVANOV v. UKRAINE - 9021/11 (Judgment : Right to a fair trial : Fifth Section Committee) [2021] ECHR 253 (25 March 2021)

The domestic courts failed to address the applicant’s specific and pertinent argument regarding his request for the 'children of war' supplement for 2009, which was important to the outcome of the case, thereby violating the principle of fairness under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention.

Citation
[2021] ECHR 253
Parties
Applicant: Valentyn Ivanovych Ivanov; Respondent: Ukraine
Jurisdiction
European Union
Judgment Date
25 March 2021
Procedural Posture
Application Under Article 34 of the European Convention on Human Rights / Final Judgment
Outcome
violation of Article 6 § 1 of the Convention found; partial award for non-pecuniary damage; remainder of claim dismissed
Legal Topics
Fair Trial, Judicial Reasoning, Pension Rights, Children of War Supplement
Human Rights Law Administrative Law Fair Trial Judicial Reasoning Pension Rights Children of War Supplement

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 2 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Valentyn Ivanovych Ivanov

Applicant

Ukraine

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Application Under Article 34 of the European Convention on Human Rights / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the domestic courts failed to address a specific and pertinent argument crucial to the applicant’s claim for a pension supplement for 2009, violating Article 6 § 1 of the Convention

Ratio Decidendi

The domestic courts failed to address the applicant’s specific and pertinent argument regarding his request for the 'children of war' supplement for 2009, which was important to the outcome of the case, thereby violating the principle of fairness under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention.

Court Disposition

violation of Article 6 § 1 of the Convention found; partial award for non-pecuniary damage; remainder of claim dismissed

Orders

  • Complaint concerning fairness of proceedings declared admissible
  • Violation of Article 6 § 1 of the Convention found