Conka v Belgium: ECHR 5 Feb 2002

ECHR Judgment (Merits and just satisfaction) Preliminary objection rejected (non-exhaustion); Violation of Art. 5-1; No violation of Art. 5-2; Violation of Art. 5-4; Violation of P4-4; No violation of Art. 13+3; Violation of Art. 13 + P4-4; Non-pecuniary damage – financial award; Costs and expenses partial award – Convention proceedings
The applicants were arrested so that they could be deported. They challenged their arrest.
51564/99, [2002] ECHR 14, [2011] ECHR 2135
Bailii, Bailii, Bailii
Human Rights
Citing:
FollowedChahal v The United Kingdom ECHR 15-Nov-1996
(Grand Chamber) The claimant was an Indian citizen who had been granted indefinite leave to remain in this country but whose activities as a Sikh separatist brought him to the notice of the authorities both in India and here. The Home Secretary of . .

Cited by:
CitedRegina v Secretary of State for the Home Department Ex parte Saadi and others HL 31-Oct-2002
The applicants were Kurdish asylum seekers. The Home Secretary introduced powers to detain certain asylum seekers for a short period in order to facilitate the speedy resolution of their applications. Only those who it was suspected might run away . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 15 March 2021; Ref: scu.167590