CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 30 août 2021

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .s379BC09C { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:right } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .s10950C61 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify } .s5E1364CA { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .s339D85E6 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:14pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s665E407E { margin-top:66pt; margin-bottom:14pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .sA1D3DA2E { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:justify } .s5FFF0A75 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:7pt } .s76CF415B { page-break-before:always; clear:both } .s75A32C27 { border-collapse:collapse } .s3695F815 { border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .s2EF62ED2 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:12pt } .sEECE831 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; color:#474747 } .sE8934522 { border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } Published on 20 September 2021   FIFTH SECTION Application no. 11992/19 Denys Sergiyovych ANIKIN against Ukraine and 2 other applications (see list appended) communicated on 30 August 2021 SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE The applications concern complaints by three practicing lawyers, under, inter alia , Article 8 of the Convention, of an allegedly unlawful and unjustified order of the Pecherskyi District Court in Kyiv taken on 7   February 2019. That order obliged a telecommunications operator to disclose to prosecutors a wide range of the applicants’ telecommunications data concerning a three-year period. The court order indicated that it was not subject to appeal. Disclosure of that data was requested on the ground that the applicants could have been implicated in the criminal offence under investigation, namely, alleged fraud related to medical reports concerning the health status of a Mr O.Sh. The applicants allege that when seeking a court order to access the data in question, the prosecutors deliberately omitted to indicate to the court that the request concerned practising lawyers and, moreover, legal counsel to Mr   O.Sh. in the ongoing criminal proceedings against him. QUESTIONS TO THE PARTIES 1.     Have the applicants exhausted all effective domestic remedies, as required by Article   35 §   1 of the Convention?   2.     Has there been an interference with the applicants’ right to respect for their private life or correspondence, within the meaning of Article   8 §   1 of the Convention? If so, was that interference in accordance with the law and necessary in terms of Article   8 §   2? APPENDIX No. Application no./ Case name Lodged on Applicant Year of Birth Place of Residence Nationality 1. 11992/19 Anikin v. Ukraine 27/05/2019   Denys Sergiyovych ANIKIN 1980 Kyiv Ukrainian 2. 42783/19 Tsygankov v. Ukraine 01/08/2019   Andriy Igorovych TSYGANKOV 1967 Kyiv Ukrainian 3. 42784/19 Plisa v. Ukraine 01/08/2019   Nataliya Mykhaylivna PLISA 1969 Kyiv Ukrainian