Today, the European Court of Human Rights delivered three decisions on the cases against Armenia.
In the cases Ghuyumchyan v. Armenia and Tovmasyan v. Armenia concerning the applicants’ complaints that they were deprived of access to court since they could not afford to hire an advocate, the Court found a violation of the Article 6 § 1 of the European Convention of Human Rights (access to court) in respect of Vahan Ghuyumchyan (the son of Garegin Ghuyumchyan) and Ms Tovmasyan. The Court awarded just satisfaction: 3,600 euros (EUR) each to Vahan Ghuyumchyan and Ms Tovmasyan in respect of non-pecuniary (moral) damage.
In the case Safaryan v. Armenia concerning the applicant’s complaints that she was unable to have her property divided and transferred to her children and to register her title in respect of a pavilion built on her plot of land, the Court found a violation of the Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 (protection of property) and awarded just satisfaction: EUR 3,000 (non-pecuniary damage) and EUR 630 (costs and expenses).
Tthese judgments are not final. During the three-month period following the judgment’s delivery, any party may request that the case be referred to the Grand Chamber of the Court. If such a request is made, a panel of five judges considers whether the case deserves further examination. In that event, the Grand Chamber will hear the case and deliver a final judgment. If the referral request is refused, the Chamber judgment will become final on that day. Under Article 28 of the Convention, judgments delivered by a Committee are final. Once a judgment becomes final, it is transmitted to the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe for supervision of its execution.
