CEDH · CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITYCOM;ENG — 5 mai 2022

.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 } .s339D85E6 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:14pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s10950C61 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .sB9D5CABB { width:28.35pt; display:inline-block } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .s3AAE10DF { margin-top:14pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .s3CA22BA { font-family:Arial; text-transform:uppercase } .s2D9C6089 { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s84651E4E { margin-top:14pt; margin-left:14.2pt; margin-bottom:3pt; text-align:justify } .s69DCC830 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .s4598CDF { width:70.9pt; display:inline-block } .sC646A315 { width:14.54pt; display:inline-block } .s376CDD9C { width:117.08pt; display:inline-block } .s9852CA4C { width:7.54pt; display:inline-block } .s9E436411 { width:138.09pt; display:inline-block }   FOURTH SECTION DECISION Application no. 65758/16 Cornel ANGHEL against Romania The European Court of Human Rights (Fourth Section), sitting on 5   May   2022 as a Committee composed of:   Armen Harutyunyan, President,   Jolien Schukking,   Ana Maria Guerra Martins, judges, and Viktoriya Maradudina, Acting Deputy Section Registrar, Having regard to the above application lodged on 2   November 2016, Having regard to the observations submitted by the respondent Government, Having deliberated, decides as follows: FACTS AND PROCEDURE The applicant, Mr Cornel Anghel, was born in 1991. The applicant’s complaint under Article 3 of the Convention concerning the inadequate conditions of detention was communicated to the Romanian Government (“the Government”). THE LAW Having examined all the material before it, the Court considers that for the reasons stated below, the application is inadmissible. In particular, the Court notes that from the information submitted by the applicant he complained about the inadequate conditions of detention he had been held in from 1 May 2015 to 27 April 2016. The information submitted by the Government confirms that the applicant was released from prison on 27   April 2016. Against this background, the Court must determine whether the applicant complied with the six-month time-limit established by Article 35 § 1 of the Convention given that the six-month rule is a public policy rule and that, consequently, it has jurisdiction to apply it of its own motion, even if the Government have not raised that objection (see Sabri Güneş v. Turkey [GC], no.   27396/06, § 29, 29 June 2012). The Court reiterates that in the absence of an effective remedy for that grievance, the complaint about inadequate conditions of detention should have been introduced within six months of the last day of the applicant’s detention (see Iacov Stanciu v. Romania , no. 35972/05, §136, 24 July 2012). The applicant introduced his complaints before the Court on 2   November 2016, which is more than six months after the end of his detention on 27   April 2016. Accordingly, this application has been introduced out of time and must be rejected in accordance with Article 35 §§ 1 and 4 of the Convention. For these reasons, the Court, unanimously, Declares the application inadmissible. Done in English and notified in writing on 25 May 2022.     Viktoriya Maradudina   Armen Harutyunyan   Acting Deputy Registrar   President