Notice of the judgment and decisions of the European Court of Human Rights published in May 2026 against the Republic of Serbia

European Court for human rights (hereinafter: the Court) is in the period from 1 to 31published 1 judgment and 2 decisions in May 2026 against the Republic of Serbia.

The verdict was passed by the seven-member panel, and the decisionstripartiteBoard.

The judgment and decisions were unanimously passed.

Ujudge Greater Y,The court dismissed the complaints regarding the violation of the right to a fair trial in the procedure for the annulment of X's adoption due to non-exhaustion of domestic legal remedies. Furthermore, the Court rejected the complaints regarding the request to repeat that procedure as incompatiblerationemateriae with the provisions of the Convention, and the complaints regarding the lack of a legal means by which the applicant could exercise the right to contact with X as clearly unfounded. Finally, the Court found no violation of Article 8 of the Convention with regard to the applicant's complaints about the loss of contact with her half-brother X after he was adopted by a family living abroad. The case concerns the termination of the applicant's contact with her half-brother X, after he was adopted by a family living abroad, the alleged violation of the right to a fair trial in connection with the adoption of X and the alleged lack of legal means by which she could exercise her right to contact with X after his adoption.

It's the courtthe decision Mirveta ISUFI brought toTo the board. The case refers to the alleged failure of the state authorities to enter the applicant's name in the birth register, due to the fact that her mother, born in the Autonomous Province of Kosovo and Metohija, did not have an identity document from the Republic of Serbia that she would attach as evidence with the corresponding request, where such a document was an explicit legal requirement for birth registration. The court decided to delete the application from the list of cases due to the unjustification of further consideration of the applicant's application.

The decision in the subject Dejan JOVANOVIĆ v. Serbia and 6 others. The court also ruled inTo the board. The case refers to the allegedly uneven domestic judicial practice regarding the request for the payment of salary supplements for overtime work, night work and work during national and religious holidays performed by police officers employed by the Ministry of the Interior, as well as to the complaints of the former,  of the second, third and fifth applicantsthat their right to property was violated, because the courts rejected their claims. The court found that the applicants' complaints under Article 6, paragraph 1 of the Convention are clearly unfounded, and the complaintsthe first three and the fifth applicant according to Article 1 of Protocol No. 1.incompatibleratione materiae with the provisions of the Convention. In this decision, the court referred to the verdictŠabanović et al. against Serbia (number 39819/16 and 4 others, dated October 7, 2025) in which he assessed that, although in one period the practice of the courts was inconsistent, this in itself is not enough to establish a violation of the Convention, especially since he determined that domestic law has a mechanism for overcoming such inconsistencies that was effectively applied (legal position formerly of the Supreme Court of Cassation on the basis of which the practice was harmonized within a reasonably short period of time).