MANDEV AND OTHERS v. BULGARIA

2024-05-21 · European Court of Human Rights · Council of Europe

read the judgment

7What it rests on

8Relied 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.

20255 judgments20263 judgments

8 judgments have relied on it, across 2025–2026

first 2025 · last 2026 · busiest 2025 (5 judgments)

What it rests on

2023-02-28STOENESCU v. ROMANIAEuropean Court of Human Rightsfollowed 2022-05-03NALBANT AND OTHERS v. TURKEYEuropean Court of Human Rights 2021-07-13TODOROV AND OTHERS v. BULGARIAEuropean Court of Human Rightsfollowed 2018-03-20RADOMILJA AND OTHERS v. CROATIAEuropean Court of Human Rightsfollowed 2016-10-11ZUBAC v. CROATIAEuropean Court of Human Rightsfollowed 1991-08-28MOREIRA DE AZEVEDO v. PORTUGAL (ARTICLE 50)European Court of Human Rightsfollowed 1987-09-14DE CUBBER v. BELGIUM (ARTICLE 50)European Court of Human Rights

12 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.

Chorbadzhiyski and Krasteva v. Bulgaria, no. 54991/10 ×2Stankov v. Bulgaria, no. 68490/01 ×2Agromodel OOD and Mironov v. Bulgaria, no. 68334/01AND OTHERS v. BULGARIA JUDGMENT Kreuz v. Poland, no. 28249/95Ataun Rojo v. Spain, no. 3344/13Azienda Agricola Silverfunghi S.a.s. and Others v. Italy, nos. 48357/07Ergezen v. Turkey, no. 73359/10Harrison McKee v. Hungary, no. 22840/07Urbanek v. Austria, no. 35123/05Weissman and Others v. Romania, no. 63945/00

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.