CEDH · PRESS;CHAMBERJUDGMENTS;ENG — 1 juin 2010

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .sA678F94A { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:right; font-size:11pt } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .s598389F8 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; font-size:11pt } .s7ED160F0 { text-decoration:none } .sCC018295 { font-family:Arial; font-size:5.33pt; vertical-align:super; color:#0069d6 } .s2E932ED2 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:11pt } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .s4DDA3AA3 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; font-style:italic } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .s4BAE41EE { font-family:Arial; font-size:11pt } .s92A5AB2 { font-family:Arial; font-size:11pt; text-decoration:underline; color:#0069d6 } .s99A63BFE { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:left; font-size:11pt } .sC7EAD8B { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; text-decoration:underline } .sF6A12959 { width:33%; height:1px; text-align:left } .s2EB42ED2 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:10pt } .s653E6C45 { font-family:Arial; font-size:6.67pt; vertical-align:super; color:#0069d6 } 445 01.06.2010   Press release issued by the Registrar   Chamber judgments [1] concerning Poland and   Romania   The European Court of Human Rights has today notified in writing the following five Chamber judgments. The judgments available only in French are indicated with an asterisk   (*).   One length-of-proceedings case with the Court’s main finding indicated, can be found at the end of the press release.     Bieniek v. Poland (application no. 46117/07)* The applicant, Robert Bieniek, is a Polish national who was born in 1975 and is currently in Warsaw Remand Centre on suspicion of having committed a number of murders. He complained, under Articles   5   §   3 (right to liberty and security) and 6   §   1 (right to a fair trial) of the European Convention on Human Rights, about the extension of his detention pending trial – which has lasted since 1999 – and about the length of the criminal proceedings brought against him. Violation of Article 5 § 3 Violation of Article 6 § 1 (length) Just satisfaction: 7,800 euros (EUR) (non-pecuniary damage) and EUR 100 (costs and expenses)   Bulfinsky v. Romania (no. 28823/04) The applicant, Cristian-Răzvan Bulfinsky, is a Romanian national who was born in 1979 and lives in Bucharest. He was found guilty of drug trafficking in April 2003 and sentenced to four years’ imprisonment, later increased on appeal to 12   years. Relying in particular on Article   6   §   1 (right to a fair trial) of the Convention, he complained about the unfairness of the criminal proceedings against him, notably alleging that he had been entrapped by police undercover agents. Violation of Article 6 § 1 (fairness) Just satisfaction: EUR 10,000 (non-pecuniary damage)   Iamandi v. Romania (no. 25867/03)* The applicant, Grigore Iamandi, is a Romanian national, who was born in 1956. He is currently serving a 20-year prison sentence in Rahova Prison in Bucharest for robbery and aggravated murder. Relying in particular on Article   3 (prohibition of inhuman or degrading treatment), he complained of the conditions of detention in Giurgiu and Rahova Prisons, particularly prison overcrowding, appalling hygiene and lack of medical assistance. Violation of Article 3 (treatment) Just satisfaction: EUR 6,000 (non-pecuniary damage) and EUR 2,000 (costs and expenses)   Răcăreanu v. Romania (no. 14262/03) The applicant, Gheorghe Răcăreanu, is a Romanian national who was born in 1971 and lives in Bucharest. He was convicted of drug trafficking in November 2001 and sentenced to ten years and four months’ imprisonment. Relying on Article   3 (prohibition of inhuman or degrading treatment), he complained in particular about the conditions of his detention. Violation of Article 3 (treatment) Just satisfaction: no claim made by the applicant within time-limit     Length-of-proceedings case   Derda v. Poland (no. 58154/08) In this case, the applicant complained in particular under Article   6   §   1 (right to a fair hearing within a reasonable time) about the excessive length of (non-criminal) proceedings. Violation of Article 6 § 1   *** These summaries by the Registry do not bind the Court. The full texts of the Court’s judgments are accessible on its Internet site ( http://www.echr.coe.int ).   Press contacts Stefano Piedimonte (telephone : 00 33 (0)3 90 21 42 04) Tracey Turner-Tretz (telephone : 00 33 (0)3 88 41 35 30) Kristina Pencheva-Malinowski (telephone : 00 33 (0)3 88 41 35 70) Céline Menu-Lange (telephone : 00 33 (0)3 90 21 58 77) Frédéric Dolt (telephone : 00 33 (0)3 90 21 53 39) Nina Salomon (telephone: 00 33 (0)3 90 21 49 79)   The European Court of Human Rights was set up in Strasbourg by the Council of Europe Member States in 1959 to deal with alleged violations of the 1950 European Convention on Human Rights.   [1] Under Article 43 of the European Convention on Human Rights, within three months from the date of a Chamber judgment, any party to the case may, in exceptional cases, request that the case be referred to the 17 ‑ member Grand Chamber of the Court. In that event, a panel of five judges considers whether the case raises a serious question affecting the interpretation or application of the Convention or its protocols, or a serious issue of general importance, in which case the Grand Chamber will deliver a final judgment. If no such question or issue arises, the panel will reject the request, at which point the judgment becomes final. Otherwise Chamber judgments become final on the expiry of the three-month period or earlier if the parties declare that they do not intend to make a request to refer.