I incorrectly predicted that there's no violation of human rights in CRĂIŢĂ v. ROMANIA.

Information

  • Judgment date: 2017-01-17
  • Communication date: 2014-06-19
  • Application number(s): 41773/09
  • Country:   ROU
  • Relevant ECHR article(s): 8, 8-1, 14
  • Conclusion:
    Violation of Article 14+8 - Prohibition of discrimination (Article 14 - Discrimination) (Article 8-1 - Respect for family life
    Article 8 - Right to respect for private and family life)
  • Result: Violation
    • SEE FINAL JUDGMENT

JURI Prediction

  • Probability: 0.929594
  • Prediction: No violation

  • Inconsistent


Legend

 In line with the court's judgment
 In opposition to the court's judgment
Darker color: higher probability
: In line with the court's judgment  
: In opposition to the court's judgment

Communication text used for prediction

Applications nos.
41773/09 and 39633/10Georgeta CRĂIŢĂ against Romaniaand Costel GACIU against Romanialodged on 20 June 2009 and 8 July 2010 respectively The facts and complaints in these cases have been summarised in the Court’s Statements of facts and Questions to the parties, which are available in HUDOC.
QUESTION Has the applicant suffered discrimination in the enjoyment of her/his Convention rights on the ground of her/his status as a remand prisoner, pending trial, contrary to Article 14 of the Convention read in conjunction with Article 8 (see Varnas v. Lithuania, no.
42615/06, 9 July 2013)?
Reference is made to the fact that under the national legislation convicted persons serving sentences in all types of prisons, have the right to conjugal visits, whilst those in pre-trial detention do not have such a right

Judgment