Generate a structured brief — facts, issues, held, reasoning, and significance — for this case in seconds. Or browse the verbatim judgment via the source links below.
This judgment will become final in the circumstances set out in Article 44 � 2 of the Convention. It may be subject to editorial revision
The European Court of Human Rights (Third Section), sitting as a Chamber composed of:
��������� Josep Casadevall, President, ��������� Alvina Gyulumyan, ��������� Corneliu B�rsan, ��������� Luis L�pez Guerra, ��������� Nona Tsotsoria, ��������� Kristina Pardalos, ��������� Johannes Silvis, judges, and Santiago Quesada , Section Registrar ,
After R.J. and M.D. left, the prosecutor arrived and searched the applicant�s office. He found the money for the bribe which had been previously marked. The applicant denied having taken money from R.J. and M.D. or having committed any crime.
The applicant contested the lawfulness of the recordings made by the prosecutor and asked that the prosecutor�s office produce the authorisation for interception and the original tapes (at the hearings of 10 April and 8 May 2003). He argued that, as R.J. had reported �the police officers� to the prosecutor, it was important to hear evidence from her in order to clarify whether she had meant the applicant in particular or somebody else from his office. He also pointed out that the transcripts disclosed that the money had not been found where R.J. had supposedly left it.
Auto-extracted from BAILII. Full structured brief in progress — the source links below give you the verbatim judgment in the meantime.
Multiple official and mirror sources — pick whichever loads cleanly on your network.
Common Room
0 comments · About the Common Room →
No comments yet — start the discussion.
Voted-best comments help future students and feed Caselaw's AI study tools.