font-size:9pt } .s24AC208E { border-right-style:solid; border-right-width:0.75pt; border-left-style:solid; border-left-width:0.75pt; border-bottom-style:solid; border-bottom-width:0.75pt; padding-right

APPLICATION No. 36651/97 Danieli AGAINST Italy (Adopted by the Committee of Ministers on 19 February 1999 at the 659th meeting of the Ministers’ Deputies) The Committee of Ministers, under the terms of

{ height:46.45pt } .sB30C44B0 { border-top-style:solid; border-top-width:0.75pt; border-right-style:solid; border-right-width:0.75pt; border-bottom-style:solid; border-bottom-width:0.75pt; padding-right

center } .s3F59B822 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; text-transform:uppercase } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt }     FOURTH SECTION DECISION Application no. 16066/14 Daniel

117.08pt; display:inline-block } .s9852CA4C { width:7.54pt; display:inline-block } .s9E436411 { width:138.09pt; display:inline-block }     FOURTH SECTION DECISION Application no. 13273/18 Daniel

SAMEK against Poland The European Court of Human Rights (Fourth Section), sitting on   11   January 2011 as a Chamber composed of:   Nicolas Bratza, President,   Lech Garlicki,  

Acting Deputy Section Registrar, Having regard to the above application lodged on 14   September 2018, Having deliberated, decides as follows: FACTS AND PROCEDURE The applicant, Mr Constantin-Daniel

MARTIN against Romania   The European Court of Human Rights (Fourth Section), sitting on 3   December 2020 as a Committee composed of:   Armen Harutyunyan, President,   Jolien Schukking

It is satisfied that the settlement is based on respect for human rights as defined in the Convention and the Protocols thereto and finds no reasons to justify a continued examination of the applications

vertical-align:super; color:#000000 }   SECOND SECTION DECISION Application no. 20509/25 Norbert RÁCZ against Hungary and 9 other applications (see appended table) The European Court of Human Rights

:solid; border-bottom-width:0.75pt; padding-right:5.03pt; padding-left:5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .sB30C44B0 { border-top-style:solid; border-top-width:0.75pt; border-right-style:solid; border-right-width

font-size:9pt } .s24AC208E { border-right-style:solid; border-right-width:0.75pt; border-left-style:solid; border-left-width:0.75pt; border-bottom-style:solid; border-bottom-width:0.75pt; padding-right

:solid; border-bottom-width:0.75pt; padding-right:5.03pt; padding-left:5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .sB30C44B0 { border-top-style:solid; border-top-width:0.75pt; border-right-style:solid; border-right-width

:solid; border-bottom-width:0.75pt; padding-right:5.03pt; padding-left:5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .sB30C44B0 { border-top-style:solid; border-top-width:0.75pt; border-right-style:solid; border-right-width

The applicants complain, under Articles 3 and 8 of the Convention, that the unjustified strip searches constituted degrading treatment and violated their right to respect for their private lives.

Hungary, The European Court of Human Rights (First Section), sitting as a Committee composed of:   Alena Poláčková, President,   Raffaele Sabato,   Davor Derenčinović, judges, and Attila

Hungary, The European Court of Human Rights (First Section), sitting as a Committee composed of:   Erik Wennerström, President,   Lorraine Schembri Orland,   Ioannis Ktistakis, judges, and

; text-align:justify; font-size:13pt } .s2EF16B1D { width:35.4pt; display:inline-block } .s2ED52ED2 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:13pt } INTERIM RESOLUTION DH (98) 219   HUMAN RIGHTS

Hungary 09/10/2018 Gheorghe Florin COMAN 1977 Szeged Romanian Dániel András KARSAI 2. 17943/19 Tóth v. Hungary 28/03/2019 László TÓTH 1987 Szeged Hungarian Dániel András KARSAI 3. 25908/19 Nagy v.

It is satisfied that the settlement is based on respect for human rights as defined in the Convention and the Protocols thereto and finds no reasons to justify a continued examination of the applications