CEDHCASELAW;RESOLUTIONS;MERITS;ENG17
CEDH · CASELAW;RESOLUTIONS;MERITS;ENG — 4 mars 1988
- ECLI
- ECLI:CEDH:001-49272
- Date
- 4 mars 1988
- Publication
- 4 mars 1988
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 officielleNo violation
Résumé généré automatiquement — à vérifier avec la décision originale.
Analyse IA non disponible
Générez un résumé intelligent de cette décision
Texte intégral
.sDD6737AE { font-size:11pt } .s211D6B00 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; line-height:normal; widows:0; orphans:0; font-size:8.5pt } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } The Committee of Ministers, under the terms of Article 32 (art. 32) of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (hereinafter referred to as "the convention"),   Having regard to the report drawn up by the European Commission of Human Rights in accordance with Article 31 (art. 31) of the convention relating to the application lodged on 24 June 1983 by Mr Sylvain Dhoest against Belgium (No. 10448/83);   Whereas on 9 July 1987 the Commission transmitted the said report to the Committee of Ministers and whereas the period of three months provided for in Article 32, paragraph 1 (art. 32-1), of the convention has elapsed without the case having been brought before the European Court of Human Rights in pursuance of Article 48 (art. 48) of the convention;   Whereas in his application the applicant complained of the legal and material conditions under which he was detained, alleging the violation of Articles 3, 5, paragraphs 1 and 4, and 7 (art. 3, art. 5-1, art. 5-4, art. 7) of the convention;   Whereas the Commission declared the application admissible on 12 July 1984 and, in its report adopted on 14 May 1987, expressed unanimously the opinion that in the present case there had been no violation of the convention;   Agreeing with the opinion expressed by the Commission in accordance with Article 31, paragraph 1 (art. 31-1), of the convention;   Voting in accordance with the provisions of Article 32, paragraph 1 (art. 32-1), of the convention,   Decides that in this case there has been no violation of the convention.    Citations
Aucune citation répertoriée pour cette décision.
Décisions connexes
Aucune décision similaire identifiée pour le moment.
Synthèse
- Juridiction
- CEDH
- Chambre
- CASELAW;RESOLUTIONS;MERITS;ENG
- Formation
- 17
- Date
- 4 mars 1988
- Matière
- droits fondamentaux
Référence
ECLI:CEDH:001-49272
Données disponibles
- Texte intégral