Source: http://contention.eu/international-and-european-case-law/
Timestamp: 2019-04-23 21:54:22+00:00

Document:
Bakhtiyari v. Australia, 6 November 2003, Comm. No. 1069/2002, UN Doc. CCPR/C/79/D/1069/2002, § 5.8.
C-534/11, Arslan, 30 May 2013, §§ 52 et seq.
C-357/09 PPU, Kadzoev (Huchbarov), 30 November 2009, § 41 et seq.
Jalloh v. the Netherlands, 26 March 2002, Comm. No. 794/1998, UN Doc. CCPR/C/74/D/794/1998, § 8.2.
HRC, Baban v. Australia, 18 September 2003, Comm. No. 1014/2001, UN Doc. CCPR/C/78/D1014/2001, § 7.2.
HRC, Madafferi v. Australia, 26 July 2004, Comm. No. 1011/2000, UN Doc. CCPR/C/81/D/1011/2001 (individual assessment of the applicant’s situation), § 9.2.
and executed with due diligence.
When detention has been ordered by administrative authorities, Member States shall: (a) either provide for a speedy judicial review of the lawfulness of detention to be decided on as speedily as possible from the beginning of detention; (b) or grant the third-country national concerned the right to take proceedings by means of which the lawfulness of detention shall be subject to a speedy judicial review to be decided on as speedily as possible after the launch of the relevant proceedings. In such a case Member States shall immediately inform the third-country national concerned about the possibility of taking such proceedings.
Bakhtiyari v. Australia, 6 November 2003, Comm. No. 1069/2002, UN Doc. CCPR/C/79/D/1069/2002, § 8.2, 9.4.
Danyal Shafiq v. Australia, 13 November 2006, Comm. No 1324/2004, UN Doc. CCPR/C/88/D/1324/2004, §§ 7.4-9.
Alim v. Russia, Appl. 39417/07, 27 September 2011, § 60 et seq.

References: v. 
 § 5
 § 41
 v. 
 § 8
 v. 
 § 7
 v. 
 § 9
 v. 
 § 8
 v. 
 v. 
 § 60