Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  BARKANYI v. HUNGARY

  (englisch)

Wird zitiert von ... (2)Zitiert selbst (2)

alle Zitatstellen anzeigen
• EGMR, 06.04.2000 - 26772/95

  LABITA c. ITALIE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 30.06.2009 - 37214/05

  Continued detention can be justified in a given case only if there are specific indications of a genuine requirement of public interest which, notwithstanding the presumption of innocence, outweighs the rule of respect for individual liberty laid down in Article 5 of the Convention (see, among other authorities, Labita v. Italy [GC], no. 26772/95, §§ 152 et seq., ECHR 2000-IV).
• EGMR, 30.03.2006 - 50358/99

  PEKOV v. BULGARIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 30.06.2009 - 37214/05

  This period involved fourteen months of pre-trial detention and thirteen months of house arrest which also falls within the scope of Article 5 (see, inter alia, Pekov v. Bulgaria, no. 50358/99, § 60).

alle Zitatstellen anzeigen
• EGMR, 07.11.2013 - 43165/10

  [FRE]

  Therefore, and in the absence of any comments by the parties on the matter, the Court accepts that the applicant's house arrest amounted to a deprivation of liberty within the meaning of Article 5 of the Convention (see Vachev v. Bulgaria, no. 42987/98, § 62, ECHR 2004-VIII (extracts); Nikolova v. Bulgaria (no. 2), no. 40896/98, § 60, 30 September 2004; N.C. v. Italy, no. 24952/94, § 33, 11 January 2001; and Bárkányi v. Hungary, no. 37214/05, § 27, 30 June 2009) for the purposes set out in sub-paragraph (f) of that Article.
• EGMR, 23.02.2010 - 48497/06

  DERMANOVIC v. SERBIA

  As noted above, the applicant was held in pre-trial detention for two years and two months, a period which may raise an issue under the Convention (see, for example, Dolasinski v. Poland, no. 6334/02, § 35, 19 December 2006; Bárkányi v. Hungary, no. 37214/05, § 27, 30 June 2009; Doronin v. Ukraine, no. 16505/02, § 61, 19 February 2009).