Strategic litigation, searchable.
82 cases across 14 issue areas. Filter by topic, outcome, or precedent strength. Each profile is a starting point for adaptation, not a finishing line.
- European Court of Human Rights· 2026· European Court of Human Rightsfavorable
J.B. v. Greece
Whether the applicant's expulsion from Greece would expose him to a real risk of treatment contrary to the prohibition of torture.
human-rightstortureeffective-remedy - European Court of Human Rights· 2026· European Court of Human Rightsfavorable
B.M. v. Switzerland
Whether the applicant’s detention after conviction was lawful and whether the applicant received an effective judicial review of that detention under the right to liberty and security.
Admissibility criteriaExhaustion of domestic remedies - European Court of Human Rights· 2026· European Court of Human Rightsfavorable
CASE OF KOVALENKO v. UKRAINE
Whether the applicant was subjected to inhuman or degrading treatment and whether the authorities conducted an effective investigation, contrary to the prohibition of torture.
Admissibility criteriaRatione personaeViolation of Article 35 - European Court of Human Rights· 2026· European Court of Human Rightsfavorable
CASE OF PETRIGNANI AND OTHERS v. ITALY
Whether the applicants' criminal convictions and the subsequent confiscation of their property breached the principle of no punishment without law and the right to peaceful enjoyment of possessions.
No violation of Article 7Violation of Article 7 - Council of Europe (ECtHR)· 2025favorable
CASE OF KUNSHUGAROV v. TÜRKİYE (no. 60811/15)
Whether Turkey's extradition of the applicant to a country where he faced a real risk of torture and the conditions of his detention violated the prohibition of torture and the right to liberty.
refugeeasylumnon-refoulementarticle 3 - Council of Europe (ECtHR)· 2025favorable
CASE OF A.B. AND Y.W. v. MALTA (no. 2559/23)
Whether the applicants’ removal to China would expose them to a real risk of treatment prohibited by Article 3 (the absolute prohibition of torture).
refugeeasylumnon-refoulementarticle 3 - 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 - Council of Europe (ECtHR)· 2024favorable
CASE OF K.J. AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA (no. 27584/20)
Whether the applicants' expulsion to North Korea would expose them to a real risk of death or torture, violating their right to life and the prohibition of inhuman treatment, and whether their pre‑expulsion detention in Russia complied with the right to liberty and security.
refugeeasylumnon-refoulementarticle 3 - Council of Europe (ECtHR)· 2024favorable
CASE OF M.H. AND S.B. v. HUNGARY (no. 10940/17)
Whether the applicants' arrest and detention were lawful under the right to liberty and security.
refugeeasylumnon-refoulement - Council of Europe (ECtHR)· 2024favorable
CASE OF H.T. v. GERMANY AND GREECE (no. 13337/19)
Whether the applicant's treatment and expulsion would expose him to a real risk of inhuman or degrading treatment, thus violating the prohibition of torture
refugeeasylumnon-refoulementarticle 3 - New South Wales, Australia· 2024· NSW Department of Communities and Justicefavorable
NSW Youth Justice Blueprint (2024)
State-wide youth justice reform strategy
blueprintnswreformtherapeutic - Australia (National)· 2024favorableHigh precedent
Tasmania Ashley Youth Detention Centre Closure 2024
abuse-responseclosuretasmaniatherapeutic-replacement - Northern Territory, Australia· 2023· NT Supreme CourtfavorableHigh precedent
Dylan Voller Settlement with NT Government (2023)
Compensation for mistreatment in Don Dale
compensationdon-dalentsettlement - 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 - Australia (National)· 2023· High Court of AustraliafavorableHigh precedent
NZYQ v Minister for Immigration, Citizenship and Multicultural Affairs [2023] HCA 37
Whether indefinite immigration detention of a non-citizen who cannot be removed in the reasonably foreseeable future is within Commonwealth power.
refugeeasylumnon-refoulementimmigration detentionindefinite detention - United Kingdom· 2023· UK Supreme CourtfavorableHigh precedent
R (AAA (Syria) & ors) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2023] UKSC 42
Safety of Rwanda, third country removals; non-refoulement; systemic risks
asylumnon-refoulementrefugeesystemic-deficienciesthird-country-transfers - Council of Europe (ECtHR)· 2023favorable
CASE OF A.M.A. v. THE NETHERLANDS (no. 23048/19)
Whether the applicant's removal to Bahrain would expose him to a real risk of treatment contrary to Article 3 (the prohibition of torture).
refugeeasylumnon-refoulementarticle 3 - Council of Europe (ECtHR)· 2023favorable
CASE OF ALHOWAIS v. HUNGARY (no. 59435/17)
Whether Hungary failed to comply with its obligations under the right to life and the prohibition of torture by not conducting an effective investigation and by not protecting the applicant’s right to life.
refugeeasylumnon-refoulementarticle 3 - Council of Europe (ECtHR)· 2023favorable
CASE OF ISRAILOV v. RUSSIA (no. 21882/09)
Whether the Russian authorities violated the applicant’s right to life, the prohibition of torture and the right to liberty, and whether they conducted an effective investigation into those alleged violations.
refugeeasylumnon-refoulementarticle 3