EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS IN ACTION / Alla Tymofeyeva (ed.)

it usually notes that the applicant, for example, does not fall within the category of persons set forth in Article 34 of the Convention because of its governmental nature. The practice shows that the first decision in a case which originated from an application submitted by a legal entity, was given in 1967 in the case of Wiener Stadtische Wechselseitige Versicherungsanstalt v. Austria . The very first decision in respect to the other applicant than a legal entity (namely, interstate complaint) was adopted in 1956, that is eleven years earlier. The first judgment in a case brought by a natural person to the Court was issued in 1960. The first judgment where the applicant was a legal entity was issued in 1986, in the case Agosi against the United Kingdom. This data shows that the rights of legal persons are protected by the Convention almost from the beginning. In 2021, the HUDOC database contains thousands of judgments and decisions concerning legal persons. One of the particular features of the case-law in respect to legal persons is the considerably higher amount of just satisfaction they receive. The Court, in July 2014, shocked the public, when it awarded compensation to the shareholders of “Neftyanaya OOO Yukos” amounting to nearly two billion euros. This part of the book will give only a basic overview of the rights, which may belong to legal persons, from the catalogue of privileges guaranteed by the Convention. Regarding the text of the Articles, it may be found in the previous chapters of this book. The General principles and explanation given under the Articles are also applicable to the applications submitted by legal persons. However, due to their artificial nature, applicability of these principles may be limited to the rights which could be alleged by legal entities. The research shows that legal persons may complain of violations of their rights under Articles of the Convention as follows: • Article 6 (right to a fair trial). Examples of the cases: Canea Catholic Church v. Greece , 16 December 1997, Reports of Judgments and Decisions 1997-VIII, Procola v. Luxembourg , 28 September 1995, Series A no. 326, Association Ekin v. France , no. 39288/98, ECHR 2001-VIII, Saarekallas OÜ v. Estonia , no. 11548/04, 8 November 2007; • Article 7 (no punishment without law). Examples of the cases: Radio France and Others v. France , no. 53984/00, ECHR 2004-II and OAO Neftyanaya Kompaniya Yukos v. Russia , no. 14902/04, 20 September 2011; • Article 8 (right to respect for private life). Examples of the cases: Wieser and Bicos Beteili- gungen GmbH v. Austria , no. 74336/01, ECHR 2007-IV; Association “21 December 1989” and Others v. Romania , nos. 33810/07 and 18817/08, 24 May 2011 and Comingersoll S.A. v. Portugal [GC], no. 35382/97, ECHR 2000-IV; • Article 9 (the right to manifest religion). Examples of the cases: Savez crkava “Riječ života” and Others v. Croatia , no. 7798/08, 9 December 2010; Church of Scientology of St Peters- burg and Others v. Russia , no. 47191/06, 2 October 2014 and The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints v. the United Kingdom , no. 7552/09, 4 March 2014; • Article 10 (freedom of expression). Examples of the cases: OOO Ivpress and Others v. Russia , nos. 33501/04, 38608/04, 35258/05 and 35618/05, 22 January 2013; Delfi AS v. Estonia , no. 64569/09, 10 October 2013 and Animal Defenders International v. the United Kingdom [GC], no. 48876/08, ECHR 2013 (extracts). • Article 11 (freedom of assembly and association). Examples of the cases: Partidul Comu- nistilor (Nepeceristi) and Ungureanu v. Romania , no. 46626/99, ECHR 2005-I (extracts), 2. ARTICLES OF THE CONVENTION APPLICABLE TO LEGAL PERSONS

122

EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS IN ACTION