Contract

the citation graph

SAHIN v. GERMANY

2001-10-11 · European Court of Human Rights · Council of Europe

read the judgment

1What it rests on

30Relied on since

0Departed from

Relied on since

The judgments that cite this one. This is the answer that tells you the case is still alive.

+7 earlier20172 judgments5 years silent20228 judgments20231 judgments20242 judgments20253 judgments20261 judgments

30 judgments have relied on it, across 2005–2026

first 2005 · last 2026 · busiest 2022 (8 judgments)

2026-04-09NOVÁK v. THE CZECH REPUBLICEuropean Court of Human Rightsfollowed 2025-06-24A AND B v. MALTAEuropean Court of Human Rightsfollowed 2025-06-24M.L. v. NORTH MACEDONIAEuropean Court of Human Rightsfollowed 2025-01-07F.D. AND H.C. v. PORTUGALEuropean Court of Human Rightsfollowed 2024-12-19X AND OTHERS v. SLOVENIAEuropean Court of Human Rightsfollowed 2024-12-03GIANNAKOPOULOS v. GREECEEuropean Court of Human Rightsfollowed 2023-02-14BYČENKO v. LITHUANIAEuropean Court of Human Rights×2followed 2022-11-10N.V. AND C.C. v. MALTAEuropean Court of Human Rightsfollowed 2022-10-11BEELER v. SWITZERLANDEuropean Court of Human Rightsfollowed 2022-09-20POPADIĆ v. SERBIAEuropean Court of Human Rights 2022-07-21KATSIKEROS v. GREECEEuropean Court of Human Rightsfollowed 2022-07-07JURIŠIĆ v. CROATIA (No. 2)European Court of Human Rightsfollowed 2022-05-19T.C. v. ITALYEuropean Court of Human Rightsfollowed 2022-03-24A.M. v. NORWAYEuropean Court of Human Rightsfollowed 2022-03-24MICKOVSKI v. NORTH MACEDONIAEuropean Court of Human Rightsfollowed 2017-04-13TAGAYEVA AND OTHERS v. RUSSIAEuropean Court of Human Rightsfollowed 2017-02-07LASHMANKIN AND OTHERS v. RUSSIAEuropean Court of Human Rightsfollowed 2015-01-27PARADISO AND CAMPANELLI v. ITALYEuropean Court of Human Rights×2followed 2011-12-13X v. LATVIAEuropean Court of Human Rightsfollowed 2011-09-27DIAMANTE AND PELLICCIONI v. SAN MARINOEuropean Court of Human Rightsfollowed 2010-07-06NEULINGER AND SHURUK v. SWITZERLANDEuropean Court of Human Rightsfollowed 2010-04-01S.H. AND OTHERS v. AUSTRIAEuropean Court of Human Rightsfollowed 2009-12-22SEJDIĆ AND FINCI v. BOSNIA AND HERZEGOVINAEuropean Court of Human Rights 2009-09-18VARNAVA AND OTHERS v. TURKEYEuropean Court of Human Rightsfollowed 2009-07-09MOOREN v. GERMANYEuropean Court of Human Rightsfollowed 2008-11-27SALDUZ v. TURKEYEuropean Court of Human Rights 2008-02-12KAFKARIS v. CYPRUSEuropean Court of Human Rights 2008-01-22E.B. v. FRANCEEuropean Court of Human Rightsfollowed 2007-07-12JORGIC v. GERMANYEuropean Court of Human Rightsfollowed 2005-12-15KYPRIANOU v. CYPRUSEuropean Court of Human Rightsfollowed

What it rests on

2000-07-13ELSHOLZ v. GERMANYEuropean Court of Human Rights

Departed from

No judgment recorded a departure from this one.

Departure is not detected yet, and the gap is deliberate. Searching for the words the Court might use was measured on 1,019 judgments: "depart from" appears 100 times and most often means departing from the facts found by a domestic court; "overruled" appears 44 times, usually about a domestic judgment; "abandon" appears 123 times, most often as abandoned firearms. Tightened to require the Court itself as the subject, precision was still around 40%, the rest being a dissenting judge complaining, or a national supreme court departing from its own case-law. Telling a lawyer an authority is dead when it is alive is worse than saying nothing, so nothing is what this says until each candidate can be judged properly.

not characterised

Most citations carry no word at all. The Court does not always say what it is doing when it cites one of its own judgments, and where it stayed silent nothing is inferred here.