Judgment Ignatov v. Ukraine - pre-trial detention procedure still not compliant with the Convention

CtEDO 2016-01-28 0,91

Kyiv City Court of Appeal had quashed a decision by the Golosiyivskyy District Court of Kyiv on a person’s pre-trial detention because the application for the preventive measure had been lodged by the Kyiv City prosecutor’s office with the

CtEDO 2014-05-19 0,89

detention fell short of the requirements of Article 3 of the Convention and were incompatible with his state of health. He complains under Article 5 § 1 of the Convention that there was no justification to place him in detention. The applic

CtEDO 2024-06-13 0,89

effective remedies thereof; excessive length of pre-trial detention; lack of, or inadequate, compensation for unlawful arrest or detention and for the violation of Article 5, paragraph 3, of the Convention; excessive length of criminal proc

CtEDO 2012-12-14 0,89

that his pre-trial detention was unreasonably long and unsubstantiated in violation of Article 5 § 3 of the Convention. QUESTIONS TO THE PARTIES 1. Has the applicant been subjected to inhuman or degrading treatment, in breach of Article 3 o

CtEDO 2019-04-29 0,89

requirements of Article 5 § 1 of the Convention? 7. Has there been a violation of Article 5 § 3 of the Convention? In particular, were the reasons relied upon by the domestic courts in their decision to extend the applicant’s pre-trial dete