European Court of Human Rights | In Principle

Go to content
Subscribe to newsletter
In principle newsletter subscription form

European Court of Human Rights

Careful with seizing an automobile as security
On 21 December 2021, the European Court of Human Rights issued a judgment in Stołkowski v Poland (application no. 58795/15) holding that Poland had violated the applicant’s property rights. The case involved the long impoundment of the applicant’s car as security in a criminal case pending against him, which resulted in decimation of the vehicle’s value. Relying on principles of property rights, the court decided when impoundment of a car may be disproportionate, despite the existing public interest and legal basis for application of such a measure.
Careful with seizing an automobile as security
Acquittal of a drunk driver does not exclude civil liability
In December 2020, the European Court of Human Rights issued its judgment in Papageorgiou v Greece (application No. 44101/13), holding that despite his prior acquittal, the imposition of civil liability on a driver for causing an accident under the influence of alcohol did not violate the presumption of innocence. The case provides an opportunity to discuss how the outcome of criminal proceedings impacts drunk drivers’ liability for damages.
Acquittal of a drunk driver does not exclude civil liability
New rulings on liability for online comments
The European Court of Human Rights has held that an NGO operating an online blog cannot be held liable for comments posted by internet users because the organisation quickly deleted the offending posts. Meanwhile, the Warsaw Court of Appeal has held the publisher of a news site liable even though it was not notified of the unlawfulness of comments before being sued. These new rulings provide an occasion for sharing a few remarks about online defamation.
New rulings on liability for online comments
Grzelak v Poland
The failure to offer ethics classes in Polish public schools, resulting in absence of a grade for this subject in the student’s transcript, constitutes unlawful discrimination on religious grounds, the European Court of Human Rights has held.
Grzelak v Poland