Case of European Court of Human Rights, January 21, 2021 (case KOSURNYIKOV AND OTHERS v. HUNGARY)

Defense:HUNGARY
Resolution Date:January 21, 2021

FIRST SECTION

CASE OF KOSURNYIKOV AND OTHERS v. HUNGARY

(Application no. 59017/14)

JUDGMENT

STRASBOURG

21 January 2021

This judgment is final but it may be subject to editorial revision.

In the case of Kosurnyikov and Others v. Hungary,

The European Court of Human Rights (First Section), sitting as a Committee composed of:

Alena Poláčková, President,Péter Paczolay,Gilberto Felici, judges,and Renata Degener, Deputy Section Registrar,

Having regard to:

the application (no. 59017/14) against Hungary lodged with the Court under Article 34 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (“the Convention”) by three Hungarian nationals, Mr Igor Kosurnyikov, Ms Simon Katalin Zsuzsanna Kosurnyikovné and Ms Dorottya Natália Kosurnyikov (“the applicants”), on 21 August 2014;

the decision to give notice to the Hungarian Government (“the Government”) of the complaint concerning Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 and to declare inadmissible the remainder of the application;

the parties’ observations;

Having deliberated in private on 16 December 2020,

Delivers the following judgment, which was adopted on that date:

INTRODUCTION

  1. The application concerns the attachment, in criminal proceedings on charges of money laundry, of all the applicant family’s bank accounts. The measure has been in place since 2010.

    THE FACTS

  2. The applicants were born in 1954, 1956 and 1987 respectively and live in Budapest. They were represented by Ms A. Falusi, a lawyer practising in Budapest.

  3. The Government were represented by their Agent, Mr Z. Tallódi, of the Ministry of Justice.

  4. The facts of the case, as submitted by the parties, may be summarised as follows.

  5. The City of London Police opened criminal proceedings against a British national on charges of embezzlement and money laundry. On 5 February 2010 the Southwark Crown Court ordered the attachment of the bank accounts where money had been transferred from the defendant’s bank account.

  6. Relying on the European Convention on Cooperation in Criminal Matters, the London Crown Attorney’s Office requested from the Hungarian authorities the attachment of the applicants’ personal bank accounts and the bank account of the companies owned by one of the applicants, all held by Hungarian banks.

  7. On 31 May 2010 the Budapest Central District Court ordered the attachment of the bank accounts. On appeal, the Budapest Regional Court quashed the first-instance decision and remitted the case to the District Court. By its decision of 20 October 2010, the District Court ordered the...

To continue reading

Request your trial