CEDH · CASELAW;CLIN;ENG — 11 janvier 2011

.s3ABFC313 { font-size:10pt } .sEB86A30B { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:14pt; page-break-after:avoid } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .sA241FE93 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:18pt; text-align:justify; page-break-after:avoid; border-bottom:0.75pt solid #000000; padding-bottom:1pt } .s2EF62ED2 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:12pt } .s4DDA3AA3 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; font-style:italic } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .s8F2B0B1B { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:12pt; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:12pt } .s9FF10068 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .s5F48796F { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:justify } .s5CB9E8AB { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:justify; border-bottom:1pt solid #000000; padding-bottom:1pt } .sDF790F1E { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center } .s7ED160F0 { text-decoration:none } .s3DC36BA9 { font-family:Arial; text-decoration:underline; color:#0069d6 } Information Note on the Court’s case-law No. 137 January 2011 Berü v. Turkey - 47304/07 Judgment 11.1.2011 [Section II] Article 2 Positive obligations Article 2-1 Life Fatal attack on girl by stray dogs: no violation   Facts – The applicants are all members of the same family. In March 2001, when she was nine years old, their daughter or sister was fatally attacked by dogs on the loose near their village. An investigation was opened immediately. According to various concurring statements, the dogs had previously injured a number of villagers and had killed cattle. Some of the villagers claimed that the dogs belonged to the gendarmerie near the village, but the gendarmes stated that they were stray dogs that came to scavenge in their dustbins. The gendarme on duty that day said that he had seen the dogs attack the child but had not opened fire for fear of hitting her too. He had, however, raised the alarm, upon which his colleagues had come quickly to chase the dogs away and help the child. Proceedings against the gendarmerie commander, the gendarmes and the Ministry of the Interior were discontinued. Law – Article 2: The allegations that the dogs belonged to the gendarmes and that they had failed to prevent the attack had not been based on any reliable evidence. The domestic courts had established the facts of the case, finding that the dogs in question had been strays, and it was on their assessment that the Court based its analysis. It noted that there had already been a series of incidents before the fatal attack. However, this fact was not sufficient for the Court to find that the authorities had had a positive obligation to take preventive measures. There was nothing in the file to show that the authorities knew, or should have known, that the child was exposed to an imminent risk of death because of some stray dogs outside the village. The incident, whilst tragic, had in fact occurred by chance and the State’s responsibility could not therefore be engaged without being extended unduly. Conclusion : no violation (six votes to one). The Court also found a violation of Article 6 §   1.   © Council of Europe/European Court of Human Rights This summary by the Registry does not bind the Court. Click here for the Case-Law Information Notes