VARDANYAN AND KHALAFYAN v. ARMENIA

2022-11-08 · European Court of Human Rights · Council of Europe

read the judgment

4What it rests on

4Relied on since

0Departed from

Relied on since

The judgments that cite this one. This is the answer that tells you the case is still alive.

20231 judgments20241 judgments20251 judgments20261 judgments

4 judgments have relied on it, across 2023–2026

first 2023 · last 2026 · busiest 2023 (1 judgments)

2026-01-15MAGHERINI AND OTHERS v. ITALYEuropean Court of Human Rightsfollowed 2025-01-09PETROSYAN v. ARMENIAEuropean Court of Human Rightsfollowed 2024-02-20M.G. v. LITHUANIAEuropean Court of Human Rights 2023-06-20YENGIBARYAN AND SIMONYAN v. ARMENIAEuropean Court of Human Rightsfollowed

What it rests on

2013-11-21BOUYID v. BELGIUMEuropean Court of Human Rightsfollowed 2009-12-22SEJDIĆ AND FINCI v. BOSNIA AND HERZEGOVINAEuropean Court of Human Rightsfollowed 2000-07-13SCOZZARI AND GIUNTA v. ITALYEuropean Court of Human Rightsfollowed 2000-06-27SALMAN v. TURKEYEuropean Court of Human Rightsfollowed

13 point outside the corpus. Read from the text, but no judgment held here answers to them. They are counted rather than hidden: this corpus is a slice, not the law.

Arapkhanovy v. Russia, no. 2215/05Ayvazyan v. Armenia, no. 56717/08Fabris and Parziale v. Italy, no. 41603/13Gulyan v. Armenia, no. 11244/12Kamil Uzun v. Turkey, no. 37410/97Karpylenko v. Ukraine, no. 15509/12Kaya and Others v. Turkey, nos. 33420/96Khaylo v. Ukraine, no. 39964/02Kolevi v. Bulgaria, no. 1108/02Myumyun v. Bulgaria, no. 67258/13Nikolova and Velichkova v. Bulgaria, no. 7888/03Virabyan v. Armenia, no. 40094/05Yeter v. Turkey, no. 33750/03

Departed from

No judgment recorded a departure from this one.

Departure is not detected yet, and the gap is deliberate. Searching for the words the Court might use was measured on 1,019 judgments: "depart from" appears 100 times and most often means departing from the facts found by a domestic court; "overruled" appears 44 times, usually about a domestic judgment; "abandon" appears 123 times, most often as abandoned firearms. Tightened to require the Court itself as the subject, precision was still around 40%, the rest being a dissenting judge complaining, or a national supreme court departing from its own case-law. Telling a lawyer an authority is dead when it is alive is worse than saying nothing, so nothing is what this says until each candidate can be judged properly.

not characterised

Most citations carry no word at all. The Court does not always say what it is doing when it cites one of its own judgments, and where it stayed silent nothing is inferred here.