003-8404731-11887745

issued by the Registrar of the Court   ECHR 290 (2025)   09.12.2025   Judgments of 9 December 2025   The European Court of Human Rights has today notified in writing ten judgments1:   three Chamber judgments are summarised below;   seven Committee judgments, concerning issues which have already been examined by the Court, can   be consulted on Hudoc and do not appear in this press release.   The judgments summarised below are only available in English.   Stephan Kucera v. Austria (application no. 13810/22)   The applicant, Stephan Kucera, is an Austrian national who was born in 1981 and lives in Vienna.   The case concerns administrative criminal court proceedings which took place via videolink. On   April 2020 the municipality of Vienna issued Mr Kucera a penalty notice for breaching the Vienna   Betting Act. It was alleged that there had been no appropriate system controlling entry into the   premises of a betting shop for which he had been responsible. Mr Kucera lodged an appeal against   that notice and requested a public oral hearing. On 22 October 2020 an oral hearing took place via   videolink on account of the COVID-19 pandemic. The parties to the proceedings, including Mr Kucera,   all joined separately via a live audio and videolink.   Relying on Article 6 (right to a fair trial; right to legal assistance of own choosing) of the European   Convention on Human Rights the applicant complains that he was not permitted to participate in   person at the hearing, that the public had been excluded from the hearing and that there had been   an infringement of his right to be effectively defended by a lawyer.   No violation of Article 6 as regards the right to an oral hearing   No violation of Article 6 as regards the right to a public hearing   H.H. v. Finland (no. 19035/21)   The applicant, H.H. is a Finnish national who was born in 1968 and lives in Turku (Finland).   The case concerns H.H.’s detention under the Mental Health Act and the compulsory administration   of medication. By decisions of June and October 2020, the Administrative Court dismissed appeals   brought by H.H. against three orders made in 2019 and 2020 for her compulsory detention and refused   to examine her requests for the discontinuation of the administration of medication against her will   and for an oral hearing to be held. The Administrative Court held that, as a rule, proceedings before   administrative courts took place in writing and was in any event, unnecessary in her case. In February   the national courts held that the applicant’s rights under the European Convention had been   Under Articles 43 and 44 of the Convention, Chamber judgments are not final. During the three-month period following a Chamber   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   violated, as she had not been given the opportunity to appeal to a court against the decisions on the   administration of medication and awarded her compensation.   Relying on Article 6 (right to a fair hearing within a reasonable time) of the European Convention the   applicant complains that she did not have an oral hearing before the Administrative Court. She also   complains about the court’s refusal to hear evidence from witnesses she had suggested.   Violation of Article 5 § 4   Just satisfaction:   non-pecuniary damage: 9,000 euros (EUR)   costs and expenses: EUR 2,900   Aykaç v. Türkiye (no. 31226/09)   The applicant, Ayhan Aykaç, is a Turkish national who was born in 1964 and is detained in Mardin   (Türkiye).   The case concerns alleged unfair criminal proceedings against him owing to a lack of legal assistance   during police custody. In November 2007 the applicant was convicted of undermining the unity of the   State and its territorial integrity and sentenced to life imprisonment. The convicting court based its   decision on evidence which included statements given to the police in the absence of a lawyer.   On 16 April 2009 Mr Aykaç lodged an application with the European Court. On 23 May 2019 the Court,   sitting as a three-judge committee, decided to strike the application out of its list of cases, holding it   was no longer justified to continue the examination of the application, taking into account the   Government’s unilateral declaration, which acknowledged a violation of Mr Aykaç’s rights under the   Convention. On 27 February 2019 Mr Aykaç’s lawyer sought, unsuccessfully, the reopening of criminal   proceedings in the domestic courts on the basis of that unilateral declaration. On 22 October 2024,   following a request by the applicant, the European Court decided to restore the application to its list   of cases.   Relying on Article 6 §§ 1 and 3 (c) (right to a fair trial; right to legal assistance of own choosing) of the   Convention the applicant complains that in convicting him, the domestic courts attached weight to   the statements he had made without the assistance of a lawyer.   Violation of Article 6 §§ 1 and 3 (c)Violation of Article 6 §§ 1 and 3 (d)   Just satisfaction:   non-pecuniary damage: EUR 1,500   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.   Follow the Court on Bluesky @echr.coe.int, X ECHR_CEDH, LinkedIn, and YouTube.   Contact ECHRPress to subscribe to the press-release mailing list.   Where can the Court’s press releases be found? HUDOC - Press collection   Press contacts   [email protected]e.int | tel.: +33 3 90 21 42 08   We are happy to receive journalists’ enquiries via either email or telephone.   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)   Jane Swift (tel.: + 33 3 88 41 29 04)   Claire Windsor (tel.: + 33 3 88 41 24 01)   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.   3