Remedies

This chapter examines the remedial dimension of the European Court of Human Rights’ (ECtHR) jurisprudence on rent control under Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 (P1-1). Central to the ECtHR&s;s approach is the principle that, while compensation is essential to redress disproportionate interferences with property rights, P1-1 does not invariably guarantee full market-value compensation. The ECtHR distinguishes between unlawful state action, where full reparation may be due, and disproportionate yet lawful interferences, where compensation is calibrated on a “sliding scale” balancing the weight of the public interest against landlords’ losses. Analysis of jurisprudence shows that the ECtHR rejects both token awards and inflated, speculative valuations, preferring instead estimates grounded in actual market values. Malta emerges as an outlier in this respect, having attracted sustained criticism for providing inadequate redress to victims of P1-1 violations over an extended period. This prompted the ECtHR in Cauchi v Malta to set clearer benchmarks for compensation for past violations, permitting percentage deductions from estimated market rents to reflect both legitimate social aims and the inherent uncertainty of income during the relevant period. Remedies extend beyond pecuniary compensation: violations must cease, whether through legislative or judicial rent increases or, failing that, eviction of the tenant. More generally, the jurisprudence confirms that rent regulation remains permissible even at below-market levels, provided it secures a fair distribution of burdens between the state and private landlords.