CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 10 mai 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 10 May 2017   FIFTH SECTION Application no. 3737/17 Heinz Heinrich PIROTH against Germany lodged on 10 January 2017 SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE The application concerns the applicant’s right to trial within a reasonable time or to be released pending trial. The applicant, a national of Germany, was continuously detained on remand from 14 August 2012 until 7 March 2017, the date on which the Stuttgart Regional Court convicted him (and his co-accused) of aggravated fraud and sentenced him to 11 years and six months’ imprisonment. QUESTIONS tO THE PARTIES Was the length of the applicant’s detention on remand in breach of the “reasonable time” requirement of Article 5 § 3 of the Convention? Did the Stuttgart Regional Court display “special diligence” in the conduct of the proceedings? Did the domestic courts sufficiently consider alternative measures of ensuring the applicant’s appearance at trial?