Was the applicant deprived of his liberty in breach of Article 5 § 1 of the Convention during the period between 10 and 11 January 2022?

: Grosse délivrée le : 28 janvier 2026 aux avocats Décision déférée à la Cour : ordonnance rendue le 17 janvier 2025 (R.G. 2024004579) par le Juge commissaire du tribunal de commerce de LIBOURNE

Il faut de plus souligner que les deux décisions du tribunal de commerce de Libourne ont expressément disposé que tout règlement devait s'imputer d'abord sur les intérêts. 5.

Russia , no. 72051/17, §§   34-36, 8   October   2019, concerning various aspects of unlawful deprivation of liberty of organisers or participants of public events; and Karelin v.

However, as the applicant absconded from the hospital several times, his actual deprivation of liberty lasted around one and a half years in total.

    Was the applicant arrested and deprived of his liberty in breach of Article 5 § 1 of the Convention?

The Court considered that the national authorities had at all times acquiesced in the applicants’ loss of liberty.

Therefore, the Court acknowledged that the respondent State had already taken important steps to remedy the problems related to unjustified deprivation of liberty.

If so, was his deprivation of liberty based on a reasonable suspicion of having committed an offence? Was the deprivation of liberty lawful within the meaning of Article 5 § 1?

Par jugement du 5 février 2021, le tribunal judiciaire de Libourne a : - condamné la SA MAAF à payer à M.

la décision : AU FOND Notifié par LRAR le : Grosse délivrée le : aux avocats Décision déférée à la Cour : jugement rendu le 17 février 2023 (R.G. 13/00039) par le TJ de LIBOURNE

The applicants claimed to have been the victims of an arbitrary deprivation of liberty on account of being detained on board the Winner for 13   days under the surveillance of the French military,

Violation of Article 5 - Right to liberty and security (Article 5-3 - Length of pre-trial detention;Reasonableness of pre-trial detention);Violation of Article 5 - Right to liberty and security (Article

Remainder inadmissible;Violation of Article 5 - Right to liberty and security (Article 5-1 - Deprivation of liberty;Lawful arrest or detention;Procedure prescribed by law);Violation of Article 5 - Right

Consequently, the legal system in force at the relevant time did not provide sufficient protection against arbitrary interference with the right to liberty and security.

He relied on Article 5 § 4 of the Convention which provides: “Everyone who is deprived of his liberty by arrest or detention shall be entitled to take proceedings by which the lawfulness of his detention

Violation of Article 5 - Right to liberty and security (Article 5-3 - Length of pre-trial detention);Violation of Article 5 - Right to liberty and security (Article 5-4 - Speediness of review);Violation

Violation of Article 5 - Right to liberty and security (Article 5-1 - Deprivation of liberty;Article 5-1-f - Extradition);Violation of Article 5 - Right to liberty and security (Article 5-4 - Review of