CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 8 décembre 2025

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .s379BC09C { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:right } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .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 } .s10950C61 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } Published on 5 January 2026   THIRD SECTION Application no. 5425/20 Akin İSLAM İBRAM against Greece lodged on 15 January 2020 communicated on 8 December 2025 SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE The application concerns access to court in the proceedings concerning the suspension of operation of a minority school in Western Thrace. In May 2014 the operation of the minority elementary school located in the village of Salmoni in Rodopi was suspended by a ministerial decision, on the grounds of reorganizing the minority schools. On 22 July 2014 the applicant, as the father of a student in that school and member of the school board, together with other members of the school board, lodged with the Supreme Administrative Court (the SAC) an application for annulment of the decision. On 1 August 2014 he further requested the suspension of the ministerial decision until the SAC’s ruling. By decision no.   287/2014 the SAC rejected the suspension request. After eleven adjournments of the case, on 1   August 2019 the SAC rejected the application by judgment no.   1440/2019. It held that at the time of the hearing of the application the applicant’s child was no longer a student in the minority elementary school. Therefore, he could not be an eligible member of the school board, thus depriving the applicant of a legal interest for the annulment of the ministerial decision. Relying on Article 6 § 1 of the Convention, the applicant complains that the SAC’s failure to rule on his application earlier, together with its finding that he lacked legal interest in pursuing the case, had prevented him from having the application examined on the merits, in breach of his right of access to a court. QUESTION TO THE PARTIES Was the right of access to court, as guaranteed by Article 6 § 1 of the Convention, respected in the present case (see Frezadou v. Greece , no.   2683/12, §§ 43-50, 8 November 2018; and Vassilios Athanasiou and Others v. Greece , no. 50973/08, § 52, 21 December 2010)?