On 3 October 2006 the District Court declined jurisdiction in favour of the Justice of the Peace. On 27 February 2007 the Moscow City Court upheld that decision.

    On 13 May 1999 the Sivas Administrative Court found in favour of them and partially awarded pecuniary and non-pecuniary damage. 8.

    Was the applicant entitled to claim compensation for the alleged delay in the enforcement of the judgment in his favour under Federal Law no.

    Relying on Article   6   §   1 of the Convention, the applicant complained that the quashing of a final judgment in her favour had been unjustified and was contrary to the

    The applicant complained that the authorities had failed to enforce the judgment in his favour.

    The initial complaint by the applicant concerned alleged non-enforcement of a judgment in his favour. On 27 March 2002 the first applicant died.

  1 ON ACCOUNT OF THE AMENDMENT OF THE JUDGMENT IN THE APPLICANT'S FAVOUR 21.

The judge considered that the passages referred to by the public prosecutor incited the use of methods of violence and terror, and thus constituted propaganda in favour of the PKK.

On 10 May 2002 the Supreme Court made an order for the costs of that appeal in favour of the IBA.

    The applicants complained under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention about lengthy non-enforcement of judgments given in their favour.

The applicant had not remained inactive but had challenged the inaction on the part of the DEJA before the domestic courts, which had upheld her actions and had found in her favour.

  1 about non-enforcement of the judgment in his favour. THE LAW On 17 December 2007 the applicant informed the Court that he wanted to withdraw the application.

The applicant complained under Articles 6 § 1 and 13 of the Convention and Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 about the non-enforcement of the judgment of 15 June 2001 of the Oleksandriya Town Court in her favour

.) - 50147/99 Decision 14.6.2005 [Section II] Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 Article 1 para. 1 of Protocol No. 1 Peaceful enjoyment of possessions Annulment of a property title and a donation in favour of

Section 75 of 1983 Act operated for all practical purposes as total barrier to applicant’s publishing information with a view to influencing voters in favour of anti-abortion candidate – not necessary

Objective test: it does not necessarily follow from fact that member of tribunal has personal knowledge of witness that he will be prejudiced in favour of latter's testimony - question of nature and degree

On 4 March 2005 the Federal Commercial Court for the Moscow Circuit by its final judgment found in the plaintiffs’ favour.

The applicant complained under Articles 6 § 1, 13 and 17 of the Convention about the non-enforcement of a judgment of 30 November 2005 given in his favour against a company partly owned by the State.

The applicant complained about the lengthy non-enforcement of the domestic judgment given in his favour.