003-7327185-9997851

issued by the Registrar of the Court   ECHR 148 (2022)   05.05.2022   Judgments and decisions of 5 May 2022   The European Court of Human Rights has today given notification in writing of 14 judgments1 and   decisions2:   one Chamber judgment is summarised below;   separate press releases have been issued for two Chamber judgments in the cases of Mesić   v. Croatia (application no. 19362/18) and Vlahov v. Croatia (no. 31163/13);   Committee judgments, concerning issues which have already been examined by the Court, and   the 49 decisions, can be consulted on Hudoc and do not appear in this press release.   The judgment summarised below is available only in English.   Lia v. Malta (application no. 8709/20)   The applicants, Gilbert Lia and Natasha Lia, are Maltese nationals who were born in 1980 and 1971   respectively and live in Attard (Malta). They are married.   The case concerns the authorities’ refusal in 2015 to carry out, at the applicants’ expense,   Intracytoplasmic Sperm Injection – a procedure to assist procreation – on Ms Lia’s ova owing to her   having reached the age of 43. They had previously availed of the procedure, paid for by the State, in   2014.   The applicants rely on Article 8 (right to respect for private and family life) alone and in conjunction   with Article 14 (prohibition of discrimination) of the European Convention of Human Rights.   Violation of Article 8   Just satisfaction:   non-pecuniary damage: 8,000 euros (EUR) jointly to the applicants   costs and expenses: EUR 2,500 jointly to the applicants   This press release is a document produced by the Registry. It does not bind the Court. Decisions,   judgments and further information about the Court can be found on www.echr.coe.int. To receive   the Court’s press releases, please subscribe here: www.echr.coe.int/RSS/en or follow us on Twitter   @ECHR_CEDH.   Press contacts   [email protected] | tel.: +33 3 90 21 42 08   We would encourage journalists to send their enquiries via email.   Under Articles 43 and 44 of the Convention, Chamber judgments are not final. During the three-month period following a judgment’s   delivery, any party may request that the case be referred to the Grand Chamber of the Court. If such a request is made, a panel of five   judges considers whether the case deserves further examination. In that event, the Grand Chamber will hear the case and deliver a final   judgment. If the referral request is refused, the Chamber judgment will become final on that day. Under Article 28 of the Convention,   judgments delivered by a Committee are final.   Once a judgment becomes final, it is transmitted to the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe for supervision of its execution.   Further information about the execution process can be found here: www.coe.int/t/dghl/monitoring/execution.   Inadmissibility and strike-out decisions are final.   Tracey Turner-Tretz (tel.: + 33 3 88 41 35 30)   Denis Lambert (tel.: + 33 3 90 21 41 09)   Inci Ertekin (tel.: + 33 3 90 21 55 30)   Neil Connolly (tel.: + 33 3 90 21 48 05)   Jane Swift (tel.: + 33 3 88 41 29 04)   The European Court of Human Rights was set up in Strasbourg by the Council of Europe member   States in 1959 to deal with alleged violations of the 1950 European Convention on Human Rights.   2