Annual Report on the execution of the European Court's judgments and decisions

The Secretary General of the Council of Europe, Alain Berset, has called for further efforts to implement judgments from the European Court of Human Rights.

Commenting on the annual report for 2024 on the execution of the Court’s rulings, published today, the Secretary General said: “This report shows what a concrete, positive impact judgments from the European Court of Human Rights have on the daily lives of the people of Europe. While a lot has been achieved, more needs to be done. The efficient execution of the Court's judgments is essential for the rule of law and democratic accountability in Europe.”

The annual report from the Council of Europe’s Committee of Ministers shows that 992 cases were transferred from the European Court of Human Rights to Committee, which supervises their implementation by member states, in 2024.

Of those 992 new cases, 194 were “leading” cases – often requiring action to be taken by states to prevent the same violations happening again – and 798 were repetitive cases, based on known problems that had already been identified by the Court.

A total of 894 cases were closed by the Committee of Ministers during 2024, including 161 leading cases and 733 repetitive cases. At the end of the year, a total of 3,916 cases were pending full implementation, including 1,149 leading cases and 2,767 repetitive cases.

Despite considerable challenges caused by Russia’s on-going war of aggression, Ukraine again continued to actively engage in the implementation of judgments from the European Court of Human Rights in 2024, resulting in the closure of 75 cases (including three leading cases).

More information:

 Annua lReport 2024 of the Committee of Ministers

 Country factsheets

 Thematic factsheets

 Video on the supervision process

(coe.int)

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Greek Administrative Court rules state liable for Covid-19 vaccine side effects due to "excessive sacrifice"

Image
Greece: The Administrative Court of First Instance of Athens, in its decision no. 4202/2025, has ruled that the Greek State is liable for damages sustained by an individual due to side effects following a preventive "COVID-19" vaccination. This landmark decision was issued in a compensation lawsuit filed against the Hellenic Republic. The Case: Seeking Compensation for Vaccine-Related Harm The lawsuit was brought by a plaintiff seeking compensation for material damage and moral harm (non-pecuniary damage), alleging that they suffered severe side effects after their preventive COVID-19 vaccination with a specific vaccine. The initial claim was for €461,835.26, but this amount was subsequently restricted during the proceedings. The plaintiff based their claim on two legal grounds: Article 105 of the Introductory Law of the Civil Code (EισNAK): This article concerns the State's liability for compensation arising from illegal acts or omissions of its organs in the exe...
Read more

Ombudsman inquiry on Commission President’s text messages is a wake-up call for EU

Image
The European Ombudsman inquiry into the Commission’s handling of a request for text messages between its President and the CEO of a pharmaceutical company is a wake-up call for all EU institutions about ensuring accountability in an era of instant messaging. One year after the initial request by a journalist, the Commission has still not clarified whether messages reported to concern major vaccine procurement deals exist and whether the public is entitled to see them. The Ombudsman had asked the Commission, in a finding of maladministration in January, to conduct a more thorough search for the text messages. The Commission’s recent response failed to say whether it had looked directly and correctly for the text messages and if not, why not. While the response recognised that work-related text messages can be EU documents, it reiterated that the Commission’s internal policy is, in effect, not to register text messages. The Ombudsman has closed  the inquiry  and upheld...
Read more

The payment card user is deprived of the right to obtain a refund of an unauthorised payment transaction of which he or she has become aware if he or she delayed in notifying it to his or her provider with intent or gross negligence (CJEU)

Image
Judgment of the Court of Justice (1.8.2025) in Case C-665/23: Payment services: the payment card user is deprived of the right to obtain a refund of an unauthorised payment transaction of which he or she has become aware if he or she delayed in notifying it to his or her provider with intent or gross negligence This is the case even if he or she notified it to the payment institution within 13 months from the debit date. A consumer holds a gold deposit account with the company Veracash SAS. In March 2017 Veracash sent him a new withdrawal and payment card. Between March and May 2017, daily withdrawals were made from that account. The consumer in question claims, however, that he never received that payment card or authorised such withdrawals.  The Regional Court, Évry, (France), followed by the Court of Appeal, Paris, (France), dismissed his request for refund on the ground that the withdrawals at issue had not been notified to Veracash ‘without undue delay’, as required by the Mon...
Read more

Landmark Murder Conviction for Illegal Street Racing in Germany

Image
Following a fatal illegal street race in Ludwigsburg in March 2025, the Stuttgart District Court (LG Stuttgart) has issued a landmark ruling. The primary defendant was sentenced to life imprisonment for murder, while his brother received 13 years for attempted murder. The race resulted in the deaths of two innocent young women when their vehicle was rammed at speeds exceeding 130 km/h in a 50 km/h zone. Intent vs. Negligence The core of the legal debate centered on the definition of intent. The defense argued for "negligent homicide," claiming the defendants never intended to kill anyone. The court applied the principle of eventual intent (dolus eventualis). It ruled that by racing at extreme speeds in a residential area, the defendants recognized the life-threatening danger and "accepted" the possibility of a fatal outcome in pursuit of the thrill of the race. The ruling utilizes Section 315d of the German Criminal Code (StGB), known as the "Raserparag...
Read more

Greece is ordered to pay financial penalties for failing to comply with a 2014 judgment of the Court of Justice

Image
Judgment of the Court of Justice in Case C-368/24 /Commission v Greece (Enforcement of the judgment on the Zakynthos landfill). Failure of a Member State to fulfil its obligations: Greece is ordered to pay financial penalties for failing to comply with a 2014 judgment of the Court of Justice. Greece is ordered to pay the European Commission a periodic penalty payment of €12 500 for each day of delay until the 2014 judgment has been complied with and a lump sum of €5 500 000 In the 2014 Commission v Greece judgment, [1] the Court held that Greece had failed to fulfil its obligations under two directives on waste. [2] [3]  Greece had not put an end to the use of a landfill in the Zakynthos National Maritime Park, the habitat of the ‘Caretta caretta’ sea turtle, even though the landfill was overfull and its malfunction represented a danger to health and the environment. With regard to the present case, an exchange of correspondence took place between the European Commission and Greece...
Read more

GDPR and rail transport: A customer’s gender identity is not necessary data for the purchase of a transport ticket

Image
In its judgment in Case C-394/23 (Mousse) the EU Court of Justice ruled that a rail transport customer’s gender identity is not necessary data for the purchase of a transport ticket. The collection of data regarding customers’ titles is not objectively indispensable, in particular where its purpose is to personalise commercial communication.  The association Mousse challenged, before the French data protection authority (the CNIL), [1] the practice of the French railway undertaking SNCF Connect whereby the latter systematically requires its customers to indicate their title (‘Monsieur’ or ‘Madame’) (‘Mr’ or ‘Ms’) when purchasing transport tickets online. That association takes the view that that requirement infringes the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), [2] in particular in the light of the principle of data minimisation, because an indication of the title, which corresponds to a gender identity, does not appear to be necessary for the purchase of a rail transport ticket....
Read more