ENTRY INTO FORCE of the European Convention on Human Rights
22 January 1996
Number of implemented cases*
Saur Vallnet’s lawyer discovered a conflict of interest concerning a judge who decided on the company’s case. The European court ruled that the company was justifiably concerned about the judge’s impartiality. Andorra responded by bringing in new laws allowing national court decisions or judgments to be revised following a Strasbourg ruling finding a violation of the ECHR.
Mr Millan wanted to appeal his case to the Constitutional Tribunal. However, the law said that a government body could refuse permission – which it did. Whilst the case was in Strasbourg, the government settled it – agreeing that people should be able to appeal without government permission.
* This figure includes all judgments and decisions from the European Court of Human Rights (including friendly settlements) concerning which the Council of Europe’s Committee of Ministers has decided that all necessary follow-up measures have been taken. Source: the database of the Department for the Execution of Judgments of the ECHR, HUDOC-EXEC.