CEDHCASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG
CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 17 janvier 2022
- ECLI
- ECLI:CEDH:001-215661
- Date
- 17 janvier 2022
- Publication
- 17 janvier 2022
droits fondamentauxCEDH
Source : DILA / Judilibre · open data
Mes notes
privées · visibles par vous seulRésumé structuré
version préliminaireFaits
Non déterminable à partir du texte fourni.
Procédure
Non déterminable à partir du texte fourni.
Question juridique
Non déterminable à partir du texte fourni.
Solution
source officielleCommunicated
Résumé généré automatiquement — à vérifier avec la décision originale.
Analyse IA non disponible
Générez un résumé intelligent de cette décision
Texte intégral
.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .s379BC09C { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:right } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .s10950C61 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify } .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 } .sC7D66CED { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:14pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .s665E407E { margin-top:66pt; margin-bottom:14pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .s76CF415B { page-break-before:always; clear:both } .s598389F7 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; font-size:10pt } .s75A32C27 { border-collapse:collapse } .s3695F815 { border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .s2EB42ED2 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:10pt } .sEECE831 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; color:#474747 } .sE8934522 { border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s85226119 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:justify; font-size:10pt } .sE208486F { font-family:Arial; color:#ff0000 } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } Published on 7 February 2022   FIRST SECTION Application no. 53272/17 P.S. and A.M. against Hungary and 3 other applications (see list appended) communicated on 17 January 2022 SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASES The applications concern the confinement of the applicants in Hungarian transit zones at the border with Serbia pending the examination of their asylum requests. They invoke Article 5 §§ 1 and 4 of the Convention. Moreover, relying on Article 3 of the Convention, taken alone and in conjunction with Article 13, they further complain about the allegedly inhuman or degrading conditions in which they were held in the transit zones and the lack of an effective remedy in this respect. The applicants’ details and specific circumstances are set out in the appendix. QUESTIONS TO THE PARTIES 1.     Has there been a violation of Article 3 of the Convention on account of the applicants’ living conditions and their treatment in the border transit zones, having regard to their particular circumstances (see R.R. and Others v.   Hungary , no. 36037/17, §§ 48-52 and 58-65, 2 March 2021)?   2.     Did the applicants have at their disposal an effective domestic remedy for their above complaints under Article 3 of the Convention, as required by Article   13 of the Convention?   3.     Were the applicants deprived of their liberty in the border transit zones in breach of Article 5 § 1 of the Convention (see R.R. and Others v.   Hungary , no. 36037/17, §§ 74-92, 2 March 2021)?   4.     Did the applicants have at their disposal an effective procedure by which they could challenge the lawfulness of their detention, as required by Article 5 § 4 of the Convention (see R.R. and Others v. Hungary , no.   36037/17, §§ 97-99, 2 March 2021)?   Appendix List of applications   No. Application no. Case name Lodged on Applicant Year of Birth Place of Residence Nationality Represented by Place and period of detention Vulnerable status/special needs of the applicant 1. 53272/17 P.S. and A.M. v. Hungary 26/07/2017 P.S. Dohuk Iraqi 1986   A.M. 2012 Dohuk Iraqi Barbara POHÁRNOK Tompa transit zone 30/03/2017 – 26/07/2017 Alleged victim of domestic violence   Alleged victim of domestic violence Food allergy 2. 652/18 M.H. v. Hungary 29/12/2017 M.H. 1999 Mogyoród Afghan Szabolcs Miklós SÁNTA Röszke and Tompa transit zones 06/04/2017 – 30/06/2017   Unaccompanied minor 3. 44283/19 M.S.H. v. Hungary     15/08/2019 M.S.H. 1994 Rotenburg a. d. Fulda Iranian Szabolcs Miklós SÁNTA Tompa transit zone 18/01/2018 – 19/02/2019 4. 47321/19 S.H. v. Hungary 04/09/2019 S.H. 1991 Ehrenberg Iranian Szabolcs Miklós SÁNTA Tompa transit zone 18/01/2018 – 04/03/2019   Alleged victim of sexual and gender-based violence        Citations
Aucune citation répertoriée pour cette décision.
Décisions connexes
Aucune décision similaire identifiée pour le moment.
Synthèse
- Juridiction
- CEDH
- Chambre
- CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG
- Date
- 17 janvier 2022
- Matière
- droits fondamentaux
Référence
ECLI:CEDH:001-215661
Données disponibles
- Texte intégral
- Résumé officiel