vertical-align:top } .s6B505E72 { margin:0pt; padding-left:0pt } .s4F2ADFDB { text-align:center; font-family:Arial; font-size:8pt; list-style-position:inside } .sBB6163A7 { width:2.48pt; font:7pt 'Times New Roman

vertical-align:top } .s6B505E72 { margin:0pt; padding-left:0pt } .s4F2ADFDB { text-align:center; font-family:Arial; font-size:8pt; list-style-position:inside } .sBB6163A7 { width:2.48pt; font:7pt 'Times New Roman

'; display:inline-block }   FOURTH SECTION DECISION Application no. 27232/16 Elena NEGREANU against Romania and 16 other applications (see appended table) The European Court of Human Rights (Fourth

The applicants’ complaints under Article 3 of the Convention concerning the inadequate conditions of detention were communicated to the Romanian Government (“the Government”).

professionnelle Guy LESOURD, avocat en la Cour, et les conclusions de M. l'avocat général DINTILHAC ; Statuant sur les pourvois formés par : - LA SOCIETE TECHNIQUE ET COORDINATION - LA SOCIETE DANIEL

The applicants’ complaints under Article 3 of the Convention concerning the inadequate conditions of detention were communicated to the Romanian Government, who submitted observations on the admissibility

The applicants’ complaints under Article 3 of the Convention concerning the inadequate conditions of detention were communicated to the Romanian Government (“the Government”).

The applicants’ complaints under Article 3 of the Convention concerning the inadequate conditions of detention were communicated to the Romanian Government (“the Government”).

font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .sCEB20ECA { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:36pt; font-size:8pt }   FOURTH SECTION DECISION Application no. 833/22 Vasile SINGURELU against Romania

vertical-align:top } .s6B505E72 { margin:0pt; padding-left:0pt } .s4F2ADFDB { text-align:center; font-family:Arial; font-size:8pt; list-style-position:inside } .sBB6163A7 { width:2.48pt; font:7pt 'Times New Roman

font-family:Arial } .sFBC99493 { font-style:italic } .s51DFF5CF { margin-top:0pt; margin-left:34pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:-17pt; text-align:justify } .sE5BF05B1 { width:2.33pt; font:7pt 'Times New Roman

'; display:inline-block } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold }   FOURTH SECTION DECISION Application no. 19025/16 Gheorghe LĂCĂTUŞ against Romania and 18 other applications (see appended

The applicants’ complaints under Article 3 of the Convention concerning the inadequate conditions of detention and the lack of any effective remedy in domestic law, were communicated to the Romanian Government

'; display:inline-block } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold }   FOURTH SECTION DECISION Application no. 27954/15 Cosimo SCAGLIONE against Romania and 17 other applications (see appended

The applicants’ complaints under Article   3 of the Convention concerning the inadequate conditions of detention were communicated to the Romanian Government (“the Government”).

; display:inline-block } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .s42E65D7A { height:27.75pt }   FOURTH SECTION DECISION Application no. 15543/18 Constantin-Cristian POROJAN against Romania

1956 Judit LÓRÁNTFY 1968 Zoltán István MARÁCZI 1958 Lajosné MENTES 1931 István NAGY 1979 Józsefné NAGY 1942 János Sándorné NIKODÉM 1950 József Pálné PETRIK 1941 Béla István PILÁT 1952 László János ROZMÁN

Romania ((dec.), nos.

The applicants’ complaints under Article 3 of the Convention concerning the inadequate conditions of detention were communicated to the Romanian Government, who submitted observations on the admissibility

  5018/22 Florin ANGHEL against Romania and 20 other applications (see appended table) The European Court of Human Rights (Fourth Section), sitting on 27   March   2025 as a Committee composed