In the evening of 11 March 2007, towards eight o’clock, the applicant telephoned the police to report a disturbance caused by a group of youths outside the front door of the Mulders’ residence

    The circumstances of the case 3.     The facts of the case, as submitted by the parties, may be summarised as follows. 4.

In the case of Urukov v.

    The circumstances of the case 3.     The facts of the case as submitted by the parties may be summarised as follows. 4.

    The facts of the case, as submitted by the parties, may be summarised as follows. 4.

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

In the case of Gorshchuk v.

       The search was carried out on 21 January 1992.

In the case of B.S. v.

in private on 22 October 2024, Delivers the following judgment, which was adopted on that date: SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE 1.

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

On 24 March 2009 the Supreme Military Administrative Court dismissed his case.

They referred to the case of Holzinger v.

ET ECONOMIQUE, a rendu l'arrêt suivant : Sur le pourvoi formé par : 1°/ la société Les Sablières de Guadeloupe, société à responsabilité limitée, dont le siège est ..., 2°/ la société Les Carrières

le 31 mars 2005 (12 mois) et l'attestation de son expert-comptable attestant de la régularité et de la sincérité des documents comptables précités et de la conformité des taux de marge brute ; qu'en se

The applicants have also submitted a report by Mr Dick Karlsson, a consultant, according to which, in a large number of revocation cases concerning businesses that had been carried on for several years

    The circumstances of the case The facts of the case, as submitted by the applicant, may be summarised as follows. 1.     The background The applicant was born in Ukraine.

    PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE COMMISSION        The application was introduced on 7 March 1995 and registered on 9 March 1995.

The Court is of the view that the same principles apply where, as in the present case, an infringement of the right to life arose in the context of a death caused by a traffic accident.