003-8423564-11921102

issued by the Registrar of the Court   ECHR 004 (2026)   08.01.2026   Judgments and decisions of 8 January 2026   The European Court of Human Rights has today notified in writing 14 judgments1 and 36 decisions2:   two Chamber judgments are summarised below;   a separate press release has been issued for a Chamber judgment in the case of Finanziaria   d’investimento Fininvest S.p.A. and Berlusconi v. Italy (application nos. 23538/14 and 23554/14);   Committee judgments, concerning issues which have already been examined by the Court, and the   decisions, can be consulted on Hudoc and do not appear in this press release.   The judgments summarised below are available only in English   Ferrieri and Bonassisa v. Italy (application no. 40607/19 and 34583/20))   The applicants, Mr M. Ferrieri and Mrs O. Bonassisa, live in Cerignola (Italy) and were born in 1965   and 1977 respectively. Ms Bonassisa is an accountant.   The case concerns measures implemented by the Tax Authority (Agenzia delle Entrate) for tax audit   purposes, including access to and the examination of the applicants’ banking data, bank account   information, transaction histories, and details of other financial operations either related to the   applicants or traceable to them.   Relying on Articles 8 (right to respect for private life), taken alone and in conjunction with Article 13   (right to an effective remedy) and Article 6 § 1 (right to a fair trial) of the European Convention on   Human Rights, Mr Ferrieri and Ms Bonassisa complain that the national legislation gave the authorities   excessive scope to decide on access to taxpayers’ banking data. They also complain of the lack of   sufficient procedural safeguards to protect them against any abuse or arbitrariness, in particular the   lack of judicial or independent review of the contested measures.   Violation of Article 8   Just satisfaction: The Court held that the finding of a violation constituted in itself sufficient just   satisfaction for any non-pecuniary damage sustained by the applicants.   Tafzi El Hadri and El Idrissi Mouch v. Spain (no. 7557/23)   The applicants, Khalil Tafzi El Hadri and Omar El Idrissi Mouch, are Spanish nationals who were born   in 1966 and 1969, respectively. Mr Tafzi El Hadri lives in Hospitalet de Llobregat (Spain), while Mr EL   Idrissi Mouch lives in Brussels.   Both applicants were social educators at a residential centre for minors in Barcelona. In September   a best-selling national newspaper (ABC) published an article about radicalisation of minors in its   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   Inadmissibility and strike-out decisions are final.   online and print editions. The article was entitled “Centres for minors, seedbeds for fundamentalism”,   referring to the centre where the applicants worked and citing their names. The case concerns the   civil claim for defamation the applicants subsequently brought against the newspaper, which was   ultimately dismissed by the courts in 2022.   Relying on Article 8 (right to respect for private and family life) of the European Convention, the   applicants allege that the national courts failed to strike a fair balance between protecting their   reputation and ensuring freedom of the press. They complain in particular that the journalist had not   properly checked the facts concerning them before publishing the article and that the courts had not   looked at the impact of the publication on their professional lives or the possibility of it encouraging   Islamophobia.   No violation of Article 8   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.   2