Indicator history

In 2011-2007, the ECtHR heard three cases in which applicants claimed a violation of Article 14. The court did not find any violations of Article 14 per se.

In case of Vilho Eskelinen and others v. Finland the court found a violation of Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 taken alone or in conjunction with Article 14 of the Convention. The case concerned the applicants' wages as police officers. They were all Finnish nationals. (Application no. 63235/00, 19 April 2007)

Case of Johansson v. Finland concerned the right of parents to register a name chosen for their son. The court found that there has been a violation of Article 8 of the Convention, but the court did not examine the applicant's complaint under Article 14. (Application no. 10163/02, 6 September 2007).

Case of Gronmark v. Finland concerned a woman who was unable to have her biological father's paternity legally established due to the five-year time-limit set in national legislation for children born before the entry into force of the Paternity Act in 1976. The court found that there has been a violation of Article 8 of the Convention, but did not examine the applicant's complaint under Article 14. (Application no. 17038/04, 6 July  2010)