Case of European Court of Human Rights, July 13, 1995 (case Kampanis v. Greece)

Resolution Date:July 13, 1995
SUMMARY

Violation of Art. 5-4 Pecuniary damage - claim dismissed Non-pecuniary damage - finding of violation sufficient Costs and expenses award - domestic proceedings Costs and expenses award - Convention proceedings

 
FREE EXCERPT

Information Note on the Court’s case-law No.

July 1995

Kampanis v. Greece - 17977/91

Judgment 13.7.1995

Article 5

Article 5-4

Procedural guarantees of review

Review of lawfulness of detention

Refusal by Indictment Division of a court of appeal to give a prisoner leave to appear in order to present argument in support of his application for release: violation

[This summary is extracted from the Court’s official reports (Series A or Reports of Judgments and Decisions). Its formatting and structure may therefore differ from the Case-Law Information Note summaries.]

I.              SCOPE OF THE CASE

Not necessary for Court to consider of its own motion the proceedings relating to the application for release of 18 September 1990.

II.              ARTICLE 5 § 4 OF THE CONVENTION

The only applications for leave to appear that could be taken into account were the ones lodged by applicant on 18 December 1990, 30 January 1991 and 29 March 1991.

A.              Application of 18 December 1990

Applicant had failed to comply with time-limit laid down by relevant national law - could not therefore complain of infringement of principle of equality of arms in connection with those proceedings.

Conclusion: no violation (unanimously).

B.              Application of 30 January 1991

Prosecutor's written submissions had called for refusal of applicant's applications for release and for leave to appear - Indictment Division had ruled accordingly, although applicant had not seen those submissions and had consequently not been able to reply to them either in writing or orally.

Applicant had been in prison for twenty-five months and ten days pursuant to three successive orders, each of which had fixed a different starting-point for calculation of his detention on remand - prolongation of detention in two of those...

To continue reading

REQUEST YOUR TRIAL