CEDHCASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITYCOM;ENG28
CEDH · CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITYCOM;ENG — 14 février 2019
- ECLI
- ECLI:CE:ECHR:2019:0214DEC006568614
- Date
- 14 février 2019
- Publication
- 14 février 2019
droits fondamentauxCEDH
Source : DILA / Judilibre · open data
Mes notes
privées · visibles par vous seulRésumé structuré
version préliminaireFaits
Non déterminable à partir du texte fourni.
Procédure
Non déterminable à partir du texte fourni.
Question juridique
Non déterminable à partir du texte fourni.
Solution
source officielleInadmissible
Résumé généré automatiquement — à vérifier avec la décision originale.
Analyse IA non disponible
Générez un résumé intelligent de cette décision
Texte intégral
.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .s2EF17D91 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; font-size:2pt } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .s5E1364CA { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .s8229ABDD { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center } .sC0E715B8 { font-family:Arial; font-size:1pt; font-style:italic } .s9793A85B { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt } .sCB9E0544 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:left } .sB9D5CABB { width:28.35pt; display:inline-block } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .sD3B63DAD { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:12pt; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .sA8776625 { margin-top:18pt; margin-left:29.2pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-indent:-17.6pt; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .s4B243ECC { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s5F897A7E { margin-top:12pt; margin-left:14.2pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .sF7A4323 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:left } .s354F7CEB { width:27.79pt; display:inline-block } .sE174D402 { width:142.09pt; display:inline-block } .s67CC2216 { width:138.53pt; display:inline-block } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .s4ACA9207 { page-break-before:always; clear:both; mso-break-type:section-break } .s68C46B95 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center } .s3F59B822 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; text-transform:uppercase } .sFE10DC93 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center } .s6DB91820 { text-align:center } .s8BB62139 { margin-right:auto; margin-left:auto; border-collapse:collapse } .s3695F815 { border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .sDF237D91 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; font-size:8pt } .sEECE831 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; color:#474747 } .sE8934522 { border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top }   FOURTH SECTION DECISION Application no. 65686/14 Attila László FEHÉR against Hungary   The European Court of Human Rights (Fourth Section), sitting on 14   February 2019 as a Committee composed of:   Georges Ravarani, President,   Marko Bošnjak,   Péter Paczolay, judges, and Liv Tigerstedt, Acting Deputy Section Registrar, Having regard to the above application lodged on 12 September 2014, Having regard to the observations submitted by the respondent Government, Having deliberated, decides as follows: FACTS AND PROCEDURE The applicant’s details are set out in the appended table. The applicant’s complaint under Article 5   §   3 of the Convention concerning the excessive length of pre-trial detention was communicated to the Hungarian Government (“the Government”). THE LAW Complaint under Article 5   §   3 of the Convention Having examined all the material before it, the Court considers that the present application is inadmissible for the following reasons. The Court notes that the relevant length of the pre-trial detention was less than 13 months which cannot be considered excessive in the specific circumstances of this case. In particular, the applicant was prosecuted for drug crimes and the authorities, when prolonging his detention at the statutory intervals, considered that he was a flight risk, especially given his existential ties in the Netherlands. There is no appearance that the authorities did not process the case with the requisite diligence or that undue delays in the procedure protracted the applicant’s detention on remand. In view of the above, the Court finds that this complaint is manifestly ill ‑ founded and must be rejected in accordance with Article   35 §§   3 and   4 of the Convention. For these reasons, the Court, unanimously, Declares the application inadmissible. Done in English and notified in writing on 7 March 2019.   Liv Tigerstedt   Georges Ravarani Acting Deputy Registrar   President APPENDIX Application raising complaints under Article 5 § 3 of the Convention (excessive length of pre-trail detention) Application no. Date of introduction Applicant’s name Date of birth Period of detention Length of detention 65686/14 12/09/2014 Attila László Fehér 29/03/1965 19/09/2013 to 08/10/2014 1 year(s) and 20 day(s)    Citations
Aucune citation répertoriée pour cette décision.
Décisions connexes
Aucune décision similaire identifiée pour le moment.
Synthèse
- Juridiction
- CEDH
- Chambre
- CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITYCOM;ENG
- Formation
- 28
- Date
- 14 février 2019
- Matière
- droits fondamentaux
Référence
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2019:0214DEC006568614
Données disponibles
- Texte intégral