5.  The applicant was born in 1948 and lives in Rotterdam. 6.  On 14 November 2007 the applicant was caught in the act of trying to defraud a bank by withdrawing a sum of money from someone else’s bank account using a forged identity document. He was arrested and placed in police custody (inverzekeringstelling) for three days. 7.  On 16 November 2007 an investigating judge (rechter-commissaris) placed the applicant in initial detention on remand (inbewaringstelling) for a term of fourteen days. 8.  On 28 November 2007 the Regional Court (rechtbank) of The Hague, following a hearing in camera, dismissed the applicant’s request for suspension (schorsing) of his detention on remand (voorlopige hechtenis) and ordered the applicant’s further detention on remand (gevangenhouding) for a further ninety days. The applicant was at that time detained in the remand centre (huis van bewaring) of The Hague (north wing of Scheveningen prison). 9.  On 5 December 2007 the applicant’s counsel lodged a single appeal against both the refusal to suspend the applicant’s detention on remand and the order for the applicant’s further detention on remand. 10.  On 20 December 2007 the Court of Appeal (gerechtshof) of The Hague rejected the appeal under both heads as out of time. 11.  On 14 January 2008 the unit manager of the north wing of Scheveningen Prison replied to a query from the applicant’s counsel in the following terms:
“Dear Mr Van Zundert,
We have received your letter concerning the Regional Court’s decision in good order.
In response to your request, I wish to inform you that the Regional Court took the decision in question on 28-11-2007. On 29-11-07 the document was posted from the Regional Court, on 30-11-2007 we received the document in the late Friday afternoon post, and on 03-12-07 the document was delivered to the prison inmates administration in the afternoon, and on 04-12-07 the document was handed to Mr Van Velden. (see the copy of the official delivery record (akte van uitreiking)) ...” 12.  It appears that the Regional Court’s decision refusing to order the suspension of the applicant’s detention on remand was served on the applicant in writing on Tuesday 4 December 2007 at 3.40 p.m. A copy of the official delivery record was submitted by the applicant, annexed to the application. 13.  After the case was communicated, the respondent Government submitted a copy of an official delivery record showing that the Regional Court’s order for the applicant’s further detention on remand was served on the applicant on 29 November 2007 at 11.39 a.m. The document bears the applicant’s signature acknowledging receipt. 14.  The Government have also submitted a copy of a written notice of appeal, which is in the following terms (emphasis in the original):
“Regional Court of The Hague
Legal remedy notice (Akte rechtsmiddel)
...
On 5 December 2007 there appeared at the Registry of this Regional Court W.H. van Zundert
Advocate practising in Rotterdam
who declared that he had been specifically empowered by the person named hereafter to make the following statement, and stated, in the name of
namevan Velden
first namesRobertus Gemma Maria
...
that he appealed against the decision and against the rejection of his request for suspension taken by the Regional Court in camera on 28 November 2007.”
The document is signed by Mr van Zundert and by the registrar of the Regional Court. 15.  It appears from the Government’s submissions that the applicant was sentenced to a term of imprisonment from which the time which he had spent in detention on remand was deducted in its entirety (Article 27 of the Criminal Code (Wetboek van Strafrecht), see paragraph 18 below). The applicant does not deny this.