CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 31 mai 2019

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .sFE10DC93 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .sA6BC7FA7 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:right } .s9793A85B { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt } .s5E1364CA { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .s8229ABDD { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center } .s68C46B95 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center } .s3F59B822 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; text-transform:uppercase } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic }   Communicated on 31 May 2019   SECOND SECTION Application no. 14191/14 Liliana STRAISTĂ against the Republic of Moldova lodged on 10 February 2014 SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE The application concerns the alleged ineffectiveness of the investigation into the breach of the applicant’s private life, as well as the alleged absence of an effective remedy in respect of the complaint concerning the breach of privacy. It raises issues under Articles 8 and 13 of the Convention.. QUESTION tO THE PARTIES Do the facts of the present case disclose a breach of Article 8 and/or 13 of the Convention? In particular, have the authorities fulfilled their positive obligations under that provision in order to ensure protection of the applicant’s rights from breaches by private individuals (see, for instance, K.U. v. Finland , no. 2872/02, §§ 40-50, ECHR 2008)?