considers it clear that, given the degree of confinement at Oakington, Mr Saadi was deprived of his liberty within the meaning of Article 5 § 1 during the seven days he was held there (see, for example, Engel

Court H.R., Engel and Others judgment of 8 June 1976, Series A no. 22, pp. 33-35, paras. 80-82, and Campbell and Fell judgment of 28 June 1984, Series A no. 80, pp. 34-38, paras. 66- 73).

his or her specific situation, and account must be taken of a whole range of criteria, such as the type, duration and effects of the measure in question and the manner in which it was implemented (see Engel

That said, however, the State’s general obligation to guard against ill-treatment certainly applies to its armed forces (see generally Engel and Others v. the Netherlands judgment of 8 June 1976, Series

request to call witnesses by explaining the importance of doing so and it must be necessary for the court to take evidence from the witnesses concerned in order to be able to establish the true facts (see Engel

relate to a "criminal charge" within the meaning of Article 6 para. 1 (Art. 6-1) must be decided, according to the criteria established in the jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights (see Engel

national security dimension and the special nature of life and duties in the armed forces, the complaints are made in a special armed forces’ context to which different and more stricter rules can apply (Engel

The Court also reiterates, in this connection, that the list set out in this provision is illustrative and not exhaustive, as is shown by the words “any ground such as” (in French “ notamment ”) (see Engel

confirms those principles in the instant case, as it considers that any other solution might lead to results that are incompatible with the object and purpose of the Convention (see, mutatis mutandis , the Engel

, Series A no. 311) and only a narrow interpretation of those exceptions is consistent with the aim of that provision, namely to ensure that no one is arbitrarily deprived of his or her liberty (see Engel

  Court H.R., Engel and Others judgment of 8 June 1976, Series A no. 22) and of

Adolf or he was "charged with a criminal offence" (see, mutatis mutandis, the Engel and others judgment of 8 June 1976, Series A no. 22, p. 35, par. 82, and the König judgment of 28 June 1978, Series A

However, the criminal connotation of proceedings depends on the degree of severity of the penalty to which the person concerned is a priori liable (see Engel and Others v. the Netherlands , 8 June 1976

classification of the offence under national law, the second is the very nature of the offence, and the third is the nature and degree of severity of the penalty that the person concerned risked incurring (see Engel

Art 6 § 1 (criminal) • Criminal charge • Proceedings against defence counsels for failing to appear at defendants’ hearing not involving determination of a “criminal charge” • Application of the three Engel

In the face of such a substantial deprivation of liberty, there was clearly a “determination of a criminal charge” (see Findlay , cited above, p. 279, § 69; Engel and Others v. the Netherlands , judgment

Belgium (dec.), no. 34952/07, § 24, 18 September 2018), or, in some circumstances, military rank (see Engel and Others v. the Netherlands , 8 June 1976, § 72, Series A no. 22) can be regarded as “other

    Lord Dyson also agreed with Lord Phillips but explained in greater detail why he considered, applying the criteria laid down by the Court in Engel   and Others v. the Netherlands (8

subject, it is not in principle its function to compare different decisions of national courts, even if given in apparently similar proceedings; it must respect the independence of those courts (see Engel