Strategic litigation, searchable.
25 cases across 14 issue areas. Filter by topic, outcome, or precedent strength. Each profile is a starting point for adaptation, not a finishing line.
- Council of Europe (ECtHR)· 2026
CASE OF O.H. AND OTHERS v. SERBIA (no. 57185/17)
European Court of Human Rights judgment. Articles: 35, 35-3-a, P4-4, 3, 5, 5-1, 5-2, 5-4, 41, 37, 37-1, 37-1-a, 34. Conclusion: Remainder inadmissible (Art. 35) Admissibility criteria;(Art. 35-3-a) Manifestly ill-founded;Violation of Article 4 of Protocol No. 4 - Prohibition of collective expulsion of aliens - {general} (Artic.
refugeeasylumnon-refoulementarticle 3article 4 prot 4 - Council of Europe (ECtHR)· 2025
CASE OF H.Q. AND OTHERS v. HUNGARY (no. 46084/21)
Whether the applicants' removal to Serbia by Hungary would constitute a prohibited collective expulsion and expose them to a real risk of treatment contrary to the absolute prohibition of torture.
refugeeasylumnon-refoulementarticle 3article 4 prot 4 - Council of Europe (ECtHR)· 2024
CASE OF SHEROV AND OTHERS v. POLAND (no. 54029/17)
Whether Poland complied with the Court's judgment by providing adequate information on measures to prevent new violations and by paying the compensation awarded.
refugeeasylumnon-refoulementarticle 3article 4 prot 4 - Council of Europe (ECtHR)· 2024favorable
CASE OF M.A. AND Z.R. v. CYPRUS (no. 39090/20)
Whether Cyprus's expulsion of the applicants violated their rights under the prohibition of torture, the prohibition of collective expulsion of aliens and the right to an effective remedy.
refugeeasylumnon-refoulementarticle 3article 4 prot 4 - Council of Europe (ECtHR)· 2024favorable
CASE OF M.D. AND OTHERS v. HUNGARY (no. 60778/19)
Whether the applicants' removal by Hungarian authorities constituted a collective expulsion of aliens in breach of the prohibition under Article 4 of Protocol No. 4
refugeeasylumnon-refoulementarticle 4 prot 4 - Northern Territory, Australia· 2024· NT Coroner's Courtpending
Inquest into the Death of Kumanjayi Walker (2024)
Police shooting of Aboriginal man during welfare check
ntpolice-shootingremote-communitiessystemic-failure - Council of Europe (ECtHR)· 2023favorable
CASE OF S.S. AND OTHERS v. HUNGARY (no. 56417/19)
Whether the applicants' removal to Serbia would constitute a collective expulsion of aliens and expose them to a real risk of treatment contrary to the prohibition of torture.
refugeeasylumnon-refoulementarticle 3article 4 prot 4 - Northern Territory, Australia· 2023· NT Supreme CourtfavorableHigh precedent
Dylan Voller Settlement with NT Government (2023)
Compensation for mistreatment in Don Dale
compensationdon-dalentsettlement - Northern Territory, Australia· 2023· NT Legislative Assemblyadverselegislation
NT Youth Justice and Related Legislation Amendment Act 2023
Raising then lowering age of criminal responsibility
ntpolitical-reversalraise-the-age - Council of Europe (ECtHR)· 2022· European Court of Human RightsfavorableHigh precedent
CASE OF H.F. AND OTHERS v. FRANCE (no. 24384/19)
Whether the French authorities’ refusal to allow the applicants, who are French nationals, to return to France violated their right not to be expelled from their own country under Article 3 of Protocol No. 4.
refugeeasylumnon-refoulementarticle 3article 4 prot 4 - Council of Europe (ECtHR)· 2022· European Court of Human Rightsfavorable
CASE OF A.B. AND OTHERS v. POLAND (no. 42907/17)
Whether the applicants' removal to Belarus would expose them to treatment contrary to the prohibition of torture, and whether the removal constituted a collective expulsion of aliens in breach of the Protocol.
refugeeasylumnon-refoulementarticle 3article 4 prot 4 - Council of Europe (ECtHR)· 2022· European Court of Human Rightsadverse
CASE OF A.A. AND OTHERS v. NORTH MACEDONIA (no. 55798/16)
Whether the applicants' removal from North Macedonia constituted a collective expulsion prohibited by the Convention and whether they had an effective remedy to challenge that measure.
refugeeasylumnon-refoulementarticle 3article 4 prot 4 - Council of Europe (ECtHR)· 2022· European Court of Human Rightsfavorable
CASE OF A.I. AND OTHERS v. POLAND (no. 39028/17)
Whether Poland fulfilled its obligation to comply with final judgments by taking measures to avoid further violations and by paying the amounts awarded in the judgment.
refugeeasylumnon-refoulementarticle 3article 4 prot 4 - Northern Territory, Australia· 2022· NT Court of Criminal AppealfavorableHigh precedent
Baker v The Queen (2022) NTCCA
Cultural considerations in youth sentencing
bugmycultural-factorsntsentencing - Council of Europe (ECtHR)· 2022· European Court of Human Rightsfavorable
CASE OF T.Z. AND OTHERS v. POLAND (no. 41764/17)
Whether Poland has taken effective measures to prevent further violations of the applicants' rights following the Court's earlier finding of a violation.
refugeeasylumnon-refoulementarticle 3article 4 prot 4 - Council of Europe (ECtHR)· 2021· European Court of Human RightsfavorableHigh precedent
CASE OF GEORGIA v. RUSSIA (II) (no. 38263/08)
Whether the Russian Federation breached its obligations under the European Convention on Human Rights by violating the applicants' rights to life, freedom from torture, liberty, private and family life, protection of property, and freedom of movement during the 2008 conflict.
refugeeasylumnon-refoulementarticle 3article 4 prot 4 - Council of Europe (ECtHR)· 2021· European Court of Human Rightsfavorable
CASE OF M.H. AND OTHERS v. CROATIA (no. 15670/18)
Whether the applicants' rights to life, protection from torture, liberty, freedom from collective expulsion, and access to the Court were violated.
refugeeasylumnon-refoulementarticle 3article 4 prot 4 - Council of Europe (ECtHR)· 2021· European Court of Human Rightsfavorable
CASE OF SHAHZAD v. HUNGARY (no. 12625/17)
Whether the applicant’s removal by Hungary violated the prohibition of collective expulsion of aliens and denied him an effective remedy.
refugeeasylumnon-refoulementarticle 4 prot 4 - Council of Europe (ECtHR)· 2021· European Court of Human Rightsfavorable
CASE OF D.A. AND OTHERS v. POLAND (no. 51246/17)
Whether Poland has taken sufficient individual and general measures to prevent further violations and has paid the compensation ordered, thereby complying with its duty to abide by the Court’s judgment (Article 46).
refugeeasylumnon-refoulementarticle 3article 4 prot 4 - Council of Europe (ECtHR)· 2020· European Court of Human RightsfavorableHigh precedent
CASE OF M.K. AND OTHERS v. POLAND (no. 40503/17)
Whether the applicants' expulsion to a country where they faced a real risk of torture would breach the prohibition of torture, the right to an effective remedy, and the prohibition of collective expulsion.
refugeeasylumnon-refoulementarticle 3article 4 prot 4