Published on 15 June 2026
FOURTH SECTION
Application no. 31332/25
Elena CIOVEIE
against Romania
lodged on 30 September 2025
communicated on 26 May 2026
SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE
The application concerns allegations that the domestic authorities wrongly assessed the severity of the applicant’s disability, thus depriving her of the possibility to benefit from a personal assistant, which drastically reduced her personal autonomy.
The applicant, currently aged 64, was the victim of a road accident in January 2023, following which she was diagnosed with a medical condition for which she subsequently applied for classification as severely disabled person with a personal assistant. According to a report issued on 27 June 2023 by the social services attached to the Filiași Local Council, the applicant was suffering from multiple sequels from bone injuries (including of feet and pelvis) and other chronical diseases documented by medical certificates and she was fully dependent on support for her personal hygiene, dressing, preparing food, being unable to move around by herself (nu este deplasabilă). By administrative decision of 27 July 2023, the Dolj County Commission for the Assessment of Adults with Disabilities rejected the applicant’s request, on the grounds that her situation did not meet the criteria approved by Joint Ministerial Order No. 762/1992/2007 issued by the Minister of Health and the Minister of Labor and Social Protection. The decision in question was confirmed on 7 September 2023 by the Higher Commission for the Assessment of Adults with Disabilities.
The applicant challenged the above-mentioned administrative decisions in adversarial proceedings against both administrative authorities.
On 22 January 2025, the applicant’s action was upheld by the Dolj County Court. The court ordered the defendant to issue to the benefit of the applicant a certificate of severe disability with personal assistant. The Dolj County Commission lodged an appeal on points of law, which was upheld by a final decision of the Craiova Court of Appeal of 5 June 2025. After re-examining the merits of the case, the court of appeal dismissed the applicant’s action. The court considered that the annex to the above-mentioned joint ministerial order approving the medical and psychosocial criteria for recognising the disability status referred to congenital or early acquired osteoarticular disorders, i.e., those acquired at birth or in the first years of a person’s life, which was not the case for the applicant, whose diagnosis was the result of a road accident suffered at the age of 62.
Relying on Articles 3, 6, 8, 13 and 14 of the Convention and on Article 1 of Protocol no. 1 to the Convention, the applicant complains that the Craiova Court of Appeal failed to examine the defences and arguments she had put forward and misinterpreted the legal provisions in force. She also complains of disproportionate interference by the state in her private life, forcing her to pay all the costs of her medical care and depriving her of any source of income and material possibilities by refusing to grant her social security benefits. The applicant also alleges discrimination in relation to persons in similar situations.
QUESTIONS TO THE PARTIES
1. Has there been a violation of the applicant’s right to respect for her private life, contrary to Article 8 of the Convention, with regard to the manner in which the Craiova Court of Appeal (final decision of 5 June 2025) assessed her situation (see Jivan v. Romania, no. 62250/19, §§ 43-53, 8 February 2022, and, for illustrative purposes, Toader v. Romania, no. 22415/22, [Committee], 12 March 2024)?
2. Has the applicant suffered discrimination in the enjoyment of her Convention rights in connection with her age and health situation, contrary to Article 14 of the Convention read in conjunction with Article 8?