Jurisprudence
CAT - Spain
Complete list of decisions
|
Case Name |
Comm Number |
Date |
Articles |
Outcome |
| H. U. P. v. Spain |
6/1990 |
12 November 1991 |
|
Inadmissible |
| L. B. v. Spain |
9/1991 |
18 November 1991 |
|
Inadmissible |
| J. E. and E. B. v. Spain |
10/1993 |
14 November 1994 |
|
Inadmissible |
| Parot v. Spain |
6/1990 |
02 May 1995 |
13 |
No Violation |
| X. v. Spain |
23/1995 |
15 November 1995 |
3 |
Inadmissible |
| Blanco Abad v. Spain |
59/1996 |
14 May 1998 |
12, 13, 15 |
Violation |
| P. R. v. Spain |
160/2000 |
23 November 2000 |
|
Inadmissible |
| Roitman Rosenmann v. Spain |
176/2000 |
30 April 2002 |
5(1), 8,9, 13, 14 |
Inadmissible |
| Guridi v. Spain |
212/2002 |
17 May 2005 |
2, 4, 14 |
Violation |
| P.K. et al. v. Spain |
323/2007 |
10 November 2008 |
|
Inadmissible |
| Sonko v. Spain |
368/2008 |
25 November 2011 |
12, 16 |
Violation |
| Sodupe v. Spain |
453/2011 |
23 May 2012 |
12, 14, 15 |
Violation |
Information in this section of Bayefsky.com is as of May 2018. To update use the UN website search engine here.
CERD, CCPR, CESCR, CEDAW, CAT, CRC, CMW, CRPD and CED all have optional complaint mechanisms, whereby an individual may complain to the respective treaty body that his or her rights under the treaty have been violated. The CMW complaint mechanism is not yet in force.
Included in this section are:
- requests made by the treaty body for interim measures
- decisions to deal jointly with cases
- admissibility decisions (normally decisions determining a complaint is admissible are not issued separately and hence this category involves decisions in which complaints are found to be inadmissible)
- final views.
Information on follow-up of final Views where a violation has been found is included in the section entitled "Follow-up: Jurisprudence".
|
