KURUCZ AND OTHERS v. HUNGARY - 53928/22 (Article 5 - Right to liberty and security : First Section Committee) [2024] ECHR 217 (14 March 2024)

JUDGMENT STRASBOURG 14 March 2024 This judgment is final but it may be subject to editorial revision. In the case of Kurucz and Others v. Hungary, The European Court of Human Rights (First Section), sitting as a Committee composed of: Gilberto Felici , President , Péter Paczolay, Raffaele Sabato , judges , and Attila Teplán, Acting Deputy Section Registrar, Having deliberated in private on 15 February 2023, Delivers the following judgment, which was adopted on that date: PROCEDURE 1. The case originated in applications against Hungary lodged with the Court under Article 34 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms ("the Convention") on the various dates indicated in the appended table. 2. The Hungarian Government ("the Government") were given notice of the applications. THE FACTS 3. The list of applicants and the relevant details of the applications are set out in the appended table. 4. The applicants complained of the excessive length of their pre-trial detention. Some applicants also raised other complaints under the provisions of the Convention. THE LAW JOINDER OF THE APPLICATIONS 5. Having regard to the similar subject matter of the applications, the Court finds it appropriate to examine them jointly in a single judgment. ALLEGED VIOLATION OF ARTICLE 5 § 3 OF THE CONVENTION 6. The applicants complained principally that their pre-trial detention had been unreasonably long. They relied on Article § 3 of the Convention, which reads as follows: Article § "3. Everyone arrested or detained in accordance with the provisions of paragraph (c) of this Article shall be ... entitled to trial within a reasonable time or to release pending trial. Release may be conditioned by guarantees to appear for trial." 7. The Court observes that the general principles regarding the right to trial within a reasonable time or to release pending trial, as guaranteed by Article 5 § 3 of the Convention, have been stated in a number of its previous judgments (see, among many other authorities, Kudła v. Poland [GC], no. 30210/96 , § 110, ECHR 2000 - XI, and McKay v. the United Kingdom [GC], no. 543/03 , §§ 41-44, ECHR 2006 - X, with further references). 8. In the leading cases of Gál v. Hungary, no. 62631/11 , 11 March 2014 and Lakatos v. Hungary, no. 21786/15 , 26 June 2018, the Court already found violations in respect of the undue length of pre-trial detention. 9. Having examined all the material submitted to it, the Court has not found any fact or argument capable of persuading it to reach a different conclusion on the admissibility and merits of these complaints. Having regard to its case-law on the subject, the Court considers that in the instant case the length of the applicants' pre-trial detention was excessive. 10. These complaints are therefore admissible and disclose a breach of Article § 3 of the Convention. OTHER ALLEGED VIOLATIONS UNDER WELL-ESTABLISHED CASE-LAW 11. Some applicants submitted further complaints under Article 5 § 4 of the Convention which also raised issues, given the relevant well-established case-law of the Court (see appended table). These complaints are not manifestly ill-founded within the meaning of Article 35 § 3 (a) of the Convention, nor are they inadmissible on any other ground. Accordingly, they must be declared admissible. Having examined all the material before it, the Court concludes that they also disclose violations of the Convention in the light of its findings in among many authorities, Bandur v. Hungary , no. 50130/12 , §§ 79 to 85, 5 July 2016. APPLICATION OF ARTICLE 41 OF THE CONVENTION 12. Article 41 of the Convention provides: "If the Court finds that there has been a violation of the Convention or the Protocols thereto, and if the internal law of the High Contracting Party concerned allows only partial reparation to be made, the Court shall, if necessary, afford just satisfaction to the injured party." 13. Regard being had to the documents in its possession and to its case - law (see, in particular, Gál , cited above), the Court considers it reasonable to award the sums indicated in the appended table. FOR THESE REASONS, THE COURT, UNANIMOUSLY, Decides to join the applications; Declares the applications admissible; Holds that these applications disclose a breach of Article § 3 of the Convention concerning the excessive length of pre-trial detention; Holds that there has been a violation of the Convention as regards the other complaints raised under well-established case-law of the Court (see appended table); Holds (a) that the respondent State is to pay the applicants, within three months, the amounts indicated in the appended table, to be converted into the currency of the respondent State at the rate applicable at the date of settlement; (b) that from the expiry of the above-mentioned three months until settlement simple interest shall be payable on the above amounts at a rate equal to the marginal lending rate of the European Central Bank during the default period plus three percentage points. Done in English, and notified in writing on 14 March 2024, pursuant to Rule §§ 2 and 3 of the Rules of Court. Attila Teplán Gilberto Felici Acting Deputy Registrar President APPENDIX List of applications raising complaints under Article 5 § 3 of the Convention (excessive length of pre-trial detention) No. Application no. Date of introduction Applicant's name Year of birth Representative's name and location Period of detention Length of detention House arrest Start and end date Other complaints under well-established case-law Amount awarded for pecuniary and non-pecuniary damage and costs and expenses per applicant (in euros) [1] 53928/22 14/11/2022 István Ferenc KURUCZ Kiss Dániel Bálint Budapest 12/05/2019 to 10/11/2020 23/11/2020 to 16/09/2022 1 year(s) and 5 month(s) and 30 day(s) 1 year(s) and 9 month(s) and 25 day(s) 11/11/2020-22/11/2020 4,400 14055/23 21/03/2023 Rómeó LAKATOS Kiss Dániel Bálint Budapest 30/07/2020 pending More than 3 year(s) and 5 month(s) and 19 day(s) 4,700 15252/23 30/03/2023 János KANALAS Kiss Dániel Bálint Budapest 26/08/2020 to 06/05/2023 2 year(s) and 8 month(s) and 11 day(s) 3,800 16128/23 11/04/2023 Róbert VIDÁK Kiss Dániel Bálint Budapest 30/06/2020 to 13/06/2023 2 year(s) and 11 month(s) and 15 day(s) 3,900 16130/23 11/04/2023 Lajos VIDÁK Kiss Dániel Bálint Budapest 30/06/2020 to 28/03/2023 2 year(s) and 8 month(s) and 29 day(s) 3,800 18299/23 20/04/2023 Mihail Vasile MOISEI Kiss Dániel Bálint Budapest 16/10/2020 pending More than 3 year(s) and 3 month(s) and 2 day(s) Art. 5 (4) - excessive length of judicial review of detention - The review of detention and the decision on the applicant's appeal were significantly delayed. 5,700 18407/23 14/04/2023 László KOVÁCS Kiss Dániel Bálint Budapest 27/07/2020 to 26/07/2023 3 year(s) 3,900 19799/23 04/05/2023 Péter KALÁNYOS Kiss Dániel Bálint Budapest 25/09/2020 pending More than 3 year(s) and 3 month(s) and 30 day(s) Art. 5 (4) - excessive length of judicial review of detention - The 1-year obligatory review of the applicant's detention was unreasonably delayed. 5,700 [1] Plus any tax that may be chargeable to the applicants. BAILII: Copyright Policy | Disclaimers | Privacy Policy | Feedback | Donate to BAILII