Задать свой вопрос

Имя
Email
Суть вопроса

The largest database of analytical materials on the occupation of Crimea

More about us

Издатель

Материалы
All
Cases
Instructions for action
World experience
Analytics
Legal system
Thematic reviews
Freedom of movement | Analytics

The consistent appeal against decisions of the authorities violating the freedom of movement in the national courts is a criterium of admissibility of application before the European Court.

The practice of the European Court in cases Bolat v. Russia (Judgment of 05/10/2006; App. No. 14139/03), Nolan and K. v. Russia (Judgement of 12 February 2009; App. No. 2512/04), and in particular, the decision of the Grand Chamber on admissibility Demopoulos and others v. Turkey (Decision of 01/03/2010; Application nos. 46113/99, 3843/02, 13751/02, 13466/03, […]
Freedom of movement | Кейс

Regarding the possibility of application of Article 3 of Protocol №4 (prohibition of expulsion of nationals) and Article 1 of the Protocol №7 (procedural safeguards relating to expulsion of aliens) in the Crimean cases.

It shall be recalled that the UN General Assembly in its resolution A / RES / 68/262 of 27 March 2014 on the territorial integrity of Ukraine called upon all States, international organizations and specialized agencies not to recognize the change in the status of Crimea and Sevastopol through the referendum held on March 16 […]
Freedom of movement | Кейс

Citizens of Ukraine who can not go to the mainland Ukraine in virtue of legal restrictions or the use of discretionary powers of the State Border Service employees.

The freedom of movement can also be violated by the Ukrainian authorities. For instance, the  penalty for attempting to cross the checkpoints in case of loss of documents during the stay in  Crimea constitutes an interference with freedom of movement. Such penalty is imposed not for the fact of loss of documents but for the […]
Freedom of movement | Кейс

Citizens of Ukraine, who expressed, in accordance with Article 4 of Fedederal Constitutional Law No6 “their desire to retain their other existing citizenship and (or) citizenship of their minor children or remain without citizenship” are now unsuccessfully trying to get Russian residence permit.

In this case, the interference with freedom of movement may be a requirement of the Russian authorities to obtain a residence  permit  (under the threat of restriction of rights or even expulsion) as well as the refusal to issue such a document.   In this example, the statement remains true that such intervention is not […]