Honourable mention in new ECHR judgment

The European Court of Human Rights, in handing down the judgment SEMIK-ORZECH v. POLAND today, referred to my case AQUILINA AND OTHERS v. MALTA. The relevant paragraph speaks for itself:

The Court notes that the present case is to be distinguished from the case of Aquilina and Others v. Malta, cited above, where all the evidence heard by the domestic courts in the defamation proceedings against the applicants clearly indicated that the magistrate hearing the bigamy case had made a finding of contempt of court in respect of the lawyer appearing for the accused. In that case, however, the domestic courts (in the defamation proceedings) paid little or no attention to this evidence, preferring to rely on the brief and apparently incomplete record of the proceedings before the Court of Magistrates (see paragraphs 47 – 49 of that judgment). Moreover in that case the court reporter had shown due diligence in attempting to verify the facts, and the newspaper had published an apology two days later (paragraph 50).

If you have no idea what I’m talking about (and if you know me at all I find that hard to believe), then my note on the original judgment is here.