In the fields of politics and law, vulnerability theory argues that the concept of a "vulnerable legal subject" should replace the currently dominant notion of the "liberal legal subject" (Fineman 2008; Fineman et al. 2024). The impact of such a focus on vulnerability is particularly evident in Valentin Câmpeanu v. Romania (2014), yet the concept remains far from central in ECtHR jurisprudence. This paper examines the recent ECtHR judgment in Executief van de Moslims in België and Others v. Belgium (2024) through the lens of vulnerability. The case involves a conflict between two parties that can both be considered highly vulnerable—members of two minority religious communities in Belgium (Muslims and Jews) and animals subjected to slaughter. However, the Court gives little to no attention to this shared condition. The presentation will begin with a brief discussion of the vulnerabilities of both parties. Next, a critical vulnerability analysis of the ruling will be conducted, following a methodological framework in line with Fineman and others. Finally, the conclusion will explore whether viewing the case through the lens of vulnerability provides additional or contrasting insights compared to the Court's findings.