TCHIKHINASHVILI AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA and 1 other application

Published on 9 February 2026   SECOND SECTION Applications nos. 68306/16 and 44677/21 Gia TCHIKHINASHVILI and Others against Russia and N.G. and N.B. against Russia lodged on 10 November 2016 and 20 August 2021 respectively communicated on 19 January 2026 SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE The applications concern complaints raised under Articles 8, 13 and 14 of the Convention, Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 and Article 2 of Protocol No. 4 to the Convention. They relate to the applicants’ continuing lack of access to their homes, land and/or to cemeteries situated beyond the administrative boundary line between the breakaway region of South Ossetia[1] and the territory under the control of the Georgian government, allegedly because of their Georgian ethnic origin (see for the general context Georgia v. Russia (IV), no. 39611/18, §§ 60-73, 9 April 2024). QUESTIONS TO THE PARTIES 1.  Did the applicants have “possessions” within the meaning of Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 to the Convention? If so, has there been an unjustified interference with the applicants’ peaceful enjoyment of their possessions within the meaning of Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 owing to their allegedly continued inability to access such possessions (see Georgia v. Russia (IV), no. 39611/18, §§ 69-73, 9 April 2024, with further references)?   2.  Has there been a violation of the applicants’ right to respect for their private and family life and for their home, as guaranteed by Article 8 of the Convention, and/or of their right to liberty of movement, as guaranteed by Article 2 of Protocol No. 4 to the Convention, on account of their alleged inability to access their homes, land and/or cemeteries (see Georgia v. Russia (IV), cited above, §§ 56-73)?   3.  Did the applicants have an effective remedy at their disposal, as required by Article 13 of the Convention, in respect of their complaints (see, for the general principles, Z and Others v. the United Kingdom [GC], no. 29392/95, § 109, ECHR 2001-V)?   4.  Did the applicants suffer discrimination in the enjoyment of their Convention rights, in breach of Article 14 of the Convention, on grounds of their Georgian ethnic origin (see, for the general principles, Ukraine v. Russia (re Crimea) [GC], nos. 20958/14 and 38334/18, §§ 1181-82, 25 June 2024)?       APPENDIX List of cases:   No. Application no. Case name Lodged on Applicant Year of Birth Nationality Represented by 1. 68306/16 Tchikhinashvili and Others v. Russia 10/11/2016 Gia TCHIKHINASHVILI 1960 Georgian Tristan BABUTSIDZE 1953 Georgian Zeinab KOCHISHVILI 1974 Georgian Roland TSETSKHLADZE 1964 Georgian Ms T. ZAKARASHVILI 2. 44677/21 N.G. and N.B. v. Russia 20/08/2021 N.G. Georgian N.B. Georgian Mr N. LEGASHVILI       [1] The term “South Ossetia” refers to a region of Georgia which is currently outside the de facto control of the Georgian Government.