CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 29 novembre 2017

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .sFE10DC93 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .sA6BC7FA7 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:right } .s9793A85B { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt } .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 } .s68C46B95 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center } .s3F59B822 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; text-transform:uppercase }   Communicated on 29 November 2017   FOURTH SECTION Application no. 61675/14 Tímea KISS MENCZEL against Hungary lodged on 5 September 2014 SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE The application concerns the fairness of criminal proceedings conducted against the applicant on charges of substance abuse and larceny, in the course of which the defence apparently never had the opportunity to examine the key witness. On 27 February 2014 the Budapest Surroundings High Court finally sentenced the applicant to 2 years and 10 months (service: 27 April 2014). QUESTION tO THE PARTIES Did the applicant have a fair hearing in the determination of the criminal charges against her, in accordance with Article   6 §   1 of the Convention? In particular, was the applicant able to examine the key witness against her, as required by Article 6 § 3 (d) of the Convention?