European Court of Human Rights

Strategic litigation at the ERRC means supporting legal cases designed to expose and contribute to the elimination of discriminatory structures that prevent Roma from enjoying full equality.

The ERRC has lodged numerous cases against European countries with the Court. ERRC litigation has resulted in positive judgments relating to discrimination against Roma on a broad range of issues covered by the Convention, including police abuse, violence by non-state actors, education and housing.

Through its strategic litigation and landmark cases the ERRC has contributed the development of the Court’s jurisprudence regarding Article 14 of the European Convention on Human Rights, which prohibits discrimination in relation to substantive articles included in the Convention.

The most significant cases brought by the ERRC to date include Moldovan and Others v Romania, Secic v Croatia and D.H. and Others v the Czech Republic.

For general information see the website of the European Court of Human Rights; or visit HUDOC for case law.

Case law

Memet and others v Romania (pending)
Lakatošová and Lakatoš v Slovakia (pending)
Pastrama v Ukraine (third-party intervention, pending)
Bekir and others v Macedonia (pending)
Kósa v Hungary (third-party intervention, pending)
Aydarov and others v Bulgaria (third-party intervention, pending)
Magyar Jeti Zrt v Hungary (third-party intervention, pending)
Lacatus v Switzerland (third-party intervention, pending)
Hysenaj v Albania (third-party intervention, pending)
Alković v Montenegro (third-party intervention, pending)
Burlya v Ukraine (pending)
Bagdonavicius and others v Russia (third party intervention, 2016)
Negrea and others v Romania (pending)
Lingurar v Romania (third party intervention, pending)
Madĕrová v Czech Republic (third party intervention, pending)
Hudorovic and others v Slovenia (third party intervention, pending)
Lupu v Romania (third party intervention, 2015)
Eminov v the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia (friendly settlement, 2017)
G.H. v Hungary (2015)
Dimitrova and others v Bulgaria (third party intervention, pending) 
Cioban v Romania (third party intervention, pending) 
Hirtu and Others v France (pending) 
Balázs v Hungary and Two Other Cases (third party intervention, pending)
Fogarasi and others v Romania (third party intervention, 2017)
Winterstein and Others v France (third party intervention, 2013)
Vona v Hungary (third party intervention, 2013)
Horváth and Kiss v Hungary (2013)
Fedorchenko and Lozenko v Ukraine (2012)
Borbála Kiss v Hungary (2012)
Koky and Others v Slovakia (2012)
Kleyn and Aleksandrovich v Russia (2012)
Carabulea v Romania (2010)
Sashov v Bulgaria (2010)
Orsus and Others v Croatia (2009)
Stoica v Romania (2008)
Jasar v the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia (2007)
D.H. and Others v the Czech Republic (2007)
Šečić v Croatia (2007)
Moldovan and Others v Romania  (2005)
Nachova and Others v Bulgaria (2005)
Bekos and Koutropoulos v Greece (2005)
Balogh v Hungary (2004)
Connors v the United Kingdom (2004)
G.B. v Bulgaria (2004)
Anguelova v Bulgaria (2002)
Conka v Belgium (2002)
Velikova v Bulgaria (2000)
Assenov v Bulgaria (1998)
Chapman v the United Kingdom (2001)

Memet and others v Romania (pending)

2 May 2017

Facts

The applicants are a group of ten Romani families living in Eforie Sud, Romania. They were first evicted from their homes, which were demolished, in September 2013; the mayor called their homes an “infection” and called the families “dogs”. The families were then sheltered in an abandoned school. In July 2014, the applicants were evicted from the school and placed in small, uncomfortable modular containers. The families signed leases with the municipality to pay rent and utilities, but the amounts were clearly unaffordable and the families quickly ran up significant debts of hundreds of euros, despite having very low incomes. The authorities then decided to evict the families for failure to pay in March 2016.

more ...

horizontal rule

Lakatošová and Lakatoš v Slovakia (pending)

2 May 2017

Facts

On 16 June 2012, an off-duty police officer took an illegally purchased gun and drove to the town of Hurbanovo, Slovakia, where many Roma live. He stopped in front of one house and, without saying a word, shot at a Romani family who were in the yard. Three of them died and two others – the applicants in the case – were seriously injured. The murderer later admitted to police that when he was preparing his gun, he was thinking about how to deal with Roma from Hurbanovo.

more ...

horizontal rule

Pastrama v Ukraine (third-party intervention, pending)

18 November 2016

Facts

The applicant is a Romani woman who was living until 30 May 2012 in an unauthorised Romani settlement near railway tracks in Kyiv. That day, she and the others were forcibly - and quite violently - evicted from the site by plain-clothed police officers. The officers made the men strip to the waist and then photographed them; the officers also shot a dog. The police told the people they were evicting that they were making way for the 2012 EUFA (football) championships. The applicant unsuccessfully tried to get prosecutors to take action against those responsible. 

more ...

horizontal rule