CEDH · CASELAW;CLIN;ENG — 31 octobre 2006

.s3ABFC313 { font-size:10pt } .sEB86A30B { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:14pt; page-break-after:avoid } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .sA241FE93 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:18pt; text-align:justify; page-break-after:avoid; border-bottom:0.75pt solid #000000; padding-bottom:1pt } .s2EF62ED2 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:12pt } .s4DDA3AA3 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; font-style:italic } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .s8F2B0B1B { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:12pt; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:12pt } .s9FF10068 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .s5F48796F { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:justify } .s5CB9E8AB { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:justify; border-bottom:1pt solid #000000; padding-bottom:1pt } .sDF790F1E { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center } .s7ED160F0 { text-decoration:none } .s3DC36BA9 { font-family:Arial; text-decoration:underline; color:#0069d6 } Information Note on the Court’s case-law No. 90 October 2006 Földes and Földesné Hajlik v. Hungary - 41463/02 Judgment 31.10.2006 [Section II] Article 2 of Protocol No. 4 Article 2 para. 2 of Protocol No. 4 Freedom to leave a country Withdrawal of suspect’s passport for over a decade while criminal proceedings were pending: violation   Facts :The applicants, then a married couple, were charged with fraudulent bankruptcy. Criminal proceedings were instituted against Mr Földes and he was interrogated as a suspect. The proceedings were later extended to include his wife. In 1994 the Passport Office of the Ministry of the Interior withdrew Mr   Földes’ passport until the termination of the criminal proceedings in order to secure his availability for justice. The applicants were convicted in 2006. Law : The Court noted that the prohibition against Mr Földes leaving the country had remained unaltered for some ten years, until May 2004 when it had become possible for the applicant to travel within the European Union solely with a national identity card. The travel ban had amounted to an automatic, blanket measure of indefinite duration and had run contrary to the authorities’ duty to take appropriate care that any interference with the right to leave one’s country should be justified and proportionate. Conclusion : violation (unanimously). Article   41 – EUR 3,000 for non-pecuniary damage.   © Council of Europe/European Court of Human Rights This summary by the Registry does not bind the Court. Click here for the Case-Law Information Notes