Bayefsky.com

The United Nations Human Rights Treaties

Jurisprudence

CRPD

List of all final views

Case Name Comm Number Date Articles Outcome
H. M. v. Sweden 3/2011 19 April 2012 2(3), 3 (b, d, e), 4(1)(d), 5 (1, 3), 19(b), 25, 26 Violation
Takacs v. Sweden 1/2010 16 April 2013 5(2,3), 9, 12(5) Violation
Bujdoso v. Hungary 4/2011 09 September 2013 12, 29 Violation
Groninger et al. v. Germany 2/2010 04 April 2014 3, 4, 5, 8, 27 Violation
X v. Argentina 8/2012 11 April 2014 9, 10, 13, 14(2), 15(2), 17, 25, 26 Violation
Jungelin v. Sweden 5/2011 02 October 2014 5, 27 Violation
A.F. v. Italy 9/2012 27 March 2015 27 No Violation
Frey v. Austria 21/2014 21 August 2015 19, 2, 20, 5, 9 Violation
Beasley v. Australia 11/2013 01 April 2016 2, 4, 5, 9, 12, 13, 21, 29 Violation
Mr. X v. Tanzania 22/2014 18 August 2017 1, 5, 15, 17 Violation
Makarova v. Lithuania 030/2015 18 August 2017 12, 13, 22 Violation
Fiona Given v. Australia 019/2014 16 February 2018 4 (1) (a), (b), (d), (e), (g), 5 (2), (3), 9, 29 (a) (i), (ii), (iii) Violation
Bacher v. Austria 026/2014 16 February 2018 3, 9, 14, 19, 25, 26, 28 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:

  1. requests made by the treaty body for interim measures
  2. decisions to deal jointly with cases
  3. 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)
  4. final views.

Information on follow-up of final Views where a violation has been found is included in the section entitled "Follow-up: Jurisprudence".