CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 4 janvier 2018

.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 4 January 2018   FOURTH SECTION Application no. 61543/15 Zoltán FARKAS against Hungary lodged on 5 December 2015 SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE The application concerns the applicant’s pre-trial detention ordered on 9   October 2015 on charges of trafficking in stolen goods and other offences. The measure was prolonged on 2 November 2015. According to section 211(1a) of the Code of Criminal procedure, the prosecution’s underlying application should have been sent, together with any supporting documents of the investigation, to the applicant and his lawyer. However, this rule was not complied with. The applicant’s appeal was to no avail.   QUESTION tO THE PARTIES Was the procedure by which the applicant sought to challenge the lawfulness of his detention in conformity with Article 5 § 4 of the Convention? In particular, was the principle of equality of arms between the applicant and the prosecution respected in the present case notably in terms of access to the case documents, whose availability to the defence was required by the law?