UAB KESKO SENUKAI LITHUANIA v. LITHUANIA

2023-04-04 · European Court of Human Rights · Council of Europe

read the judgment

6What it rests on

7Relied 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.

20242 judgments20253 judgments20262 judgments

7 judgments have relied on it, across 2024–2026

first 2024 · last 2026 · busiest 2025 (3 judgments)

2026-07-07GRANDE ORIENTE D'ITALIA v. ITALYEuropean Court of Human Rightsfollowed 2026-02-17GREEN ALLIANCE v. BULGARIAEuropean Court of Human Rightsfollowed 2025-12-16ANTI-CORRUPTION FOUNDATION (FBK) AND OTHERS v. RUSSIAEuropean Court of Human Rightsfollowed 2025-04-01SHIPS WASTE OIL COLLECTOR B.V. AND OTHERS v. THE NETHERLANDS European Court of Human Rights 2025-02-06ITALGOMME PNEUMATICI S.R.L. AND OTHERS v. ITALYEuropean Court of Human Rightsfollowed 2024-12-19GRANDE ORIENTE D'ITALIA v. ITALYEuropean Court of Human Rights 2024-07-04RUSTAMKHANLI v. AZERBAIJANEuropean Court of Human Rights

What it rests on

2022-09-14H.F. AND OTHERS v. FRANCEEuropean Court of Human Rightsfollowed 2022-06-23NAUMENKO AND SIA RIX SHIPPING v. LATVIAEuropean Court of Human Rightsfollowed 2015-04-02VINCI CONSTRUCTION AND GTM GÉNIE CIVIL ET SERVICES v. FRANCEEuropean Court of Human Rightsfollowed 2013-10-15GUTSANOVI v. BULGARIAEuropean Court of Human Rightsfollowed 2013-03-14BERNH LARSEN HOLDING AS AND OTHERS v. NORWAYEuropean Court of Human Rightsfollowed 2007-10-16WIESER AND BICOS BETEILIGUNGEN GMBH v. AUSTRIAEuropean Court of Human Rightsfollowed

6 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.

AB v. Sweden, no. 18700/09Canal Plus and Others v. France, no. 29408/08Cont Pad S.R.L. v. Romania, no. 27153/07Modestou v. Greece, no. 51693/13Nicholas v. Cyprus, no. 63246/10Primagaz v. France, no. 29613/08

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.