Application no. 29496/09 by Wolfram HAUTH against Germany The European Court of Human Rights (Fifth Section), sitting on 19 October 2010 as a Committee composed of:   Mark Villiger, President,   Isabelle

MELNYK against Ukraine The European Court of Human Rights (Fifth Section), sitting on 7   December 2010 as a Committee composed of:   Mark Villiger, President,   Karel Jungwiert,   Isabelle

Ukraine , The European Court of Human Rights (Fifth Section), sitting as a Chamber composed of:   Peer Lorenzen, President,   Renate Jaeger,   Karel Jungwiert,   Rait Maruste,   Isabelle

07 JUILLET 2023 DÉCISION DÉFÉRÉE : 18/384 Jugement du POLE SOCIAL DU TJ DU HAVRE du 31 Décembre 2020 APPELANTE : Société [5] [Adresse 1] [Localité 4] représentée par Me Isabelle

applications (see list appended) The European Court of Human Rights (Fifth Section), sitting on 5 July 2011 as a Committee composed of:   Mark Villiger, President,   Karel Jungwiert,   Isabelle

The perpetrators were described as “jackals from Petelino”, “robbers” or a “gang”.

An in-cell sink and toilet were screened from view but not otherwise separated. The prisoners were allowed to leave the cell for one hour per day for exercise ( Hofgang ).

  Modern IT tools were introduced to the courts, including advanced hardware and software. More than 1,500 federal courts were equipped with computers and other technical facilities and tools.

  In January 1995 both applicants were detained pending trial for offences including accepting bribes, and in February 1996 they were each sentenced to one year and one month’s imprisonment.

The applicants were represented by Mr Giuseppe Ferraro, a lawyer practising in Naples.

The Croatian Government (“the Government”) were represented by their Agent, Ms Š. Stažnik. 3.

The other requested measures were refused in view of the defendant’s solvency and active participation in the proceedings. The applicant did not appeal. 8.

Were the proceedings before the Constitutional Court adversarial, in particular as regards the ability of the applicants to comment on the submissions of the opposing party (see   Janáček v. the Czech

The French Government (“the Government”) were represented by their Agent, Ms E. Belliard, Director of Legal Affairs, Ministry of Foreign Affairs. 3.

The applicants claimed that the grounds which the Ministry had cited were false and/or could not constitute a basis under the domestic law for refusal of state registration.

The Croatian Government (“the Government”) were represented by their Agent, Ms Š. Stažnik. 3.

    The Court has to establish first whether the costs and expenses indicated by the applicant’s representatives were actually incurred and, second, whether they were necessary and reasonable

The results were unclear. Two further blood tests were carried out in July and September 2002. Medical experts also interpreted the results of those two tests as contradictory. 19 .

The tariffs in place until 2005 were based on 5 per cent profitability.