Lexploria - Legal research enhanced by smart algorithms
Lexploria beta Legal research enhanced by smart algorithms
Menu
Browsing history:

E.B. v. ITALY

Doc ref: 23228/18 • ECHR ID: 001-204117

Document date: June 26, 2020

  • Inbound citations: 0
  • Cited paragraphs: 0
  • Outbound citations: 3

E.B. v. ITALY

Doc ref: 23228/18 • ECHR ID: 001-204117

Document date: June 26, 2020

Cited paragraphs only

Communicated on 26 June 2020 Published on 20 July 2020

FIRST SECTION

Application no. 23228/18 E.B . against Italy lodged on 9 May 2018

SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE

The applicant, a Tunisian national, reached the Italian coast on 16 October 2017 on board of a rudimentary vessel and was then transferred to the Hotspot of Lampedusa. After 10 days of stay, he was transferred to Palermo and eventually deported to Tunisia on 11 November 2017.

QUESTIONS TO THE PARTIES

1 . Has the applicant been subjected to inhuman or degrading treatment, in breach of Article 3 of the Convention, during his stay in the Hotspot of Lampedusa, having regard in particular to the material conditions of his detention (see M.S.S. v. Belgium and Greece [GC], no. 30696/09, ECHR 2011 and Tarakhel v. Switzerland [GC], no. 29217/12, ECHR 2014 ( extracts ) )?

2 . Was the applicant deprived of his liberty in breach of Article 5 § 1 of the Convention (see Khlaifia and Others v. Italy [GC], no. 16483/12, 15 December 2016) during his stay in the Hotspot of Lampedusa?

Was the applicant ’ s detention ordered “in accordance with a procedure prescribed by law”?

3 . Was the applicant informed, in a language which he understood, of the reasons for his detention as required by Article 5 § 2 of the Convention?

4 . Did the applicant have at his disposal an effective procedure by which he could challenge the lawfulness of his detention, as required by Article 5 § 4 of the Convention?

5 . Alternatively, should Article 5 considered to be inapplicable to the circumstances of the present case, has there been a restriction on the applicant ’ s right to liberty of movement , guaranteed by Article 2 § 1 of Protocol no. 4 to the Convention?

6 . Did the applicant have at his disposal an effective domestic remedy to raise before the Italian authorities his co mplaints under Articles 3 and 5 §§ 1, 2 and 4 of the Convention and Article 2 § 1 of Protocol no. 4 to the Convention, as required by Article 13 of the Convention?

© European Union, https://eur-lex.europa.eu, 1998 - 2024
Active Products: EUCJ + ECHR Data Package + Citation Analytics • Documents in DB: 398107 • Paragraphs parsed: 43931842 • Citations processed 3409255