Decision Makovetskyy v. Ukraine - Pandemic mask-mandate complaint rejected

CtEDO 2022-05-19 0,91

, nos. 1874/13 and 8567/13, § 89, 17 October 2019 ). In the instant case, the Court notes that there is nothing in the case file which could lead it to conclude that the domestic courts acted in an arbitrary or unreasonable manner in assess

CtEDO 2022-11-10 0,90

v. Ukraine (dec), no. 33641/17, 12 April 2018). In view of the above, the Court finds that these complaints are manifestly ill-founded and must be rejected in accordance with Article 35 §§ 3 and 4 of the Convention. For these reasons, the C

CtEDO 2022-09-15 0,89

Violation of Article 3 - Prohibition of torture (Article 3 - Degrading treatment) (Substantive aspect);Violation of Article 5 - Right to liberty and security (Article 5-1 - Deprivation of liberty;Lawful arrest or detention);Violation of Art

CtEDO 2022-09-15 0,89

Violation of Article 3 - Prohibition of torture (Article 3 - Degrading treatment) (Substantive aspect);Violation of Article 5 - Right to liberty and security (Article 5-1 - Deprivation of liberty;Lawful arrest or detention);Violation of Art

CtEDO 2021-02-04 0,89

(see paragraph 60 above) that the applicant company’s complaint that the Lviv Commercial Court of Appeal and the Higher Commercial Court of Ukraine had exceeded their jurisdiction was manifestly ill-founded. In addition, there is nothing in