On 6 March 2002 an investigator of the Grozny prosecutor’s office issued a notice which stated that “on 22 March 2001 the Grozny prosecutor’s office opened criminal case file no. 15029 under Article &#

    On 11 March 2005 the first applicant sought enforcement of the above judgment, proposing that it be carried out either by means of a bank account transfer or through the auctioning of the

The facts of the case, as submitted by the parties, may be summarised as follows. The applicant unsuccessfully applied for asylum in the Netherlands on two occasions.

  The case has been struck out following a friendly settlement in which 5,500 euros (EUR) is to be paid for any non-pecuniary or pecuniary damage, costs and expenses.

No. 139 March 2011 Alikaj and Others v.

On the same day an on-site inspection was carried out and a post-mortem examination of D.’s body was ordered.

In the case of Dörr v.

Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (hereinafter referred to as "the Convention"),        Having regard to the judgment of the European Court of Human Rights in the Kruslin case

The Court had already examined this new remedy in a case concerning a different complaint* and had concluded that it was effective.

    The circumstances of the case The facts of the case, as submitted by the applicants, may be summarised as follows.

The facts of the case, as submitted by the applicant, may be summarised as follows.

    The circumstances of the case The facts of the case, as submitted by the applicant, may be summarised as follows. The applicant was arrested on 27 March 2003.

The article informed the public about a criminal case concerning charges related to a large-scale human trafficking scheme carried out by way of recruiting employees for work abroad under false pretences

The facts of the case, as submitted by the applicants, may be summarised as follows.

Relying on Article 6 of the Convention and Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 to the Convention, the applicants complain that the cadastral survey was not carried out properly as the land was not classified as

The facts of the case, as submitted by the applicants, may be summarised as follows. At the material time the first applicant was a military officer.

In consequence, the case was transferred to the Lublin Regional Court. 21.     Subsequently, hearings were held on 25 January and 21   March 2000. 22.

As to the examination carried out by the medical panel on 28   March 2013, the court found that it had been unlawfully conducted.

In the case of Bulović v.