CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 25 octobre 2022

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .s379BC09C { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:right } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .sD5DF731 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; 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 } .s665E407E { margin-top:66pt; margin-bottom:14pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .s10950C61 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .s76CF415B { page-break-before:always; clear:both } .s6DB91820 { text-align:center } .s8BB62139 { margin-right:auto; margin-left:auto; border-collapse:collapse } .s1F1D88E { height:69.45pt } .s3695F815 { border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .s2EF62ED2 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:12pt } .sEECE831 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; color:#474747 } .s1F8BD88E { height:68.95pt } .sE8934522 { border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } Published on 14 November 2022   FIRST SECTION Application no. 11765/17 Lambros KALANTZIS against Greece and 2 other applications (see list appended) communicated on 25 October 2022 SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE The applications concern the service of documents related to criminal proceedings against the applicant which took place as if he was of unknown address. In particular, the Public Prosecutor’s office searched the applicant to serve him the documents detailing the charges and the hearing dates, as well as subsequently the convicting decisions, to his old business address, which had in the meantime been closed. The notification to the applicant took place as him being of unknown address, even though his home address had been known to the Public Prosecutor’s office from another pending criminal case. The applicant’s subsequent remedies (appeals and/or applications for annulment of proceedings) were rejected. QUESTION TO THE PARTIES Has there been a violation of Article 6 § 1 in conjunction with Article 6   §   3 of the Convention on account of the modalities of the applicant’s notification of the charges and hearing dates, and of the convicting decisions? In particular, did the service of charges, as well as of the convicting decisions to the applicant as a person of unknown address fulfil the requirements of a fair trial and respect for the rights of the defence, having also regard to the fact that the applicant’s home address was known to the Public Prosecutor’s office from other pending cases (see in this regard Popovitsi v. Greece , no.   53451/07, 14 January 2010; Elyasin v. Greece , no. 46929/06, 28 May 2009)?   Appendix No. Application no. Case name Lodged on Applicant Year of Birth Place of Residence Nationality Represented by 1. 11765/17 Kalantzis v.   Greece 05/02/2017 Lambros KALANTZIS 1980 Thessaloniki Greek Panteleimon KARAMBINAS 2. 20632/17 Kalantzis v.   Greece 24/09/2017   Lambros KALANTZIS 1980 Thessaloniki Greek Panteleimon KARAMBINAS 3. 70798/17 Kalantzis v.   Greece 09/03/2017 Lambros KALANTZIS 1980 Thessaloniki Greek Panteleimon KARAMBINAS