FINAL 06/06/2012 This judgment has become final under Article 44 § 2 of the Convention. It may be subject to editorial revision

Turning then to the necessity of the interference, the Chamber, after noting that it found itself confronted for the first time with the question whether the

The Constitutional Court was of the view that abrogating the authorisation requirement would, on the one hand, expose persons interviewed by the press to the risk of

The applicant complained that his detention at Budapest Prison in overcrowded cells amounted to inhuman and degrading treatment which infringed Article 3 of

The CTU acknowledged that his initial conclusions (of July 2008) had to be altered, having regard to the application lodged before the Court by the first applicant; as

Following an overall examination of the applicant’s case, the Court concludes that the applicant has failed to adduce evidence capable of demonstrating that there

Finally, no obligation to reopen the criminal proceedings against the police officers arose from the Court’s decision of 10 February 2009, since that decision could not

In the present case which concerns the applicant’s detention at the Immigration Centre, the majority of judges has found that there would be a violation of Article 3 of

Municipal State Attorney’s Office dismissed the criminal complaint, on the grounds that the injuries the applicant had sustained were self-inflicted and that he