s25D5DE94 { margin-top:66pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:7pt } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } Communicated on 13 March

12pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center } .s7ED160F0 { text-decoration:none } .s3DC36BA9 { font-family:Arial; text-decoration:underline; color:#0069d6 } Information Note on the Court’s case-law 205 March

Par jugement du 21 mars 2025, le tribunal a ordonné la poursuite de la période d'observation.

The party may bring an action within six months of receiving the State Attorney's Office reply that the party's proposal referred to in the previous paragraph was not acceded to, or after the expiry of

        STRASBOURG 16 March 2021 This judgment is final but it may be subject to editorial revision. In the case of Vagapov and Yefremov v.

Vu l'article 700 du code de procédure civile, rejette les demandes ; Dit que sur les diligences du procureur général près la Cour de cassation, le présent arrêt sera transmis pour être transcrit en marge

Attendu, selon l'arrêt attaqué (Orléans, 19 mai 2005), que, le 8 juin 1998, la société Techniques de sciage au diamant (la société TSD) a acheté à la société Anciens établissements Branger (la société

On 2 March 2009 the Vasileostrovskiy District Court of the city of St   Petersburg granted the request. It appears that the applicant has been neither notified, nor aware of the above events.

On 31   March 2011 the Kurganskiy Town Court of the Kurgan Region found no evidence of the policemen’s negligence.

ÚS 690/24 of 12   March 2025, which was served on her lawyer on 20 March 2025.

Il indique avoir déposé le 27 mars 2023 à son nom deux marques semi- figuratives à représantant l’une de la chaise, l’autre du bridge Luxembourg surmontées de son nom, ce qui corrobore selon lui sa titularité

    On 23 March 2017 M.M. asked the Baia Mare Police to be present at all visits between R.S.V. and the applicant because of the child’s reaction after such contacts.

On 10 March 2022 the Appeal Court held that the applicant’s detention order of 2 March 2000 had “expired” on 28 February 2012.

domestic courts’ refusal to examine the merits of the applicants’ actions compatible with the guarantee of Article 6 § 1, construed in the light of the rule of law, that everyone should have the right to bring

width:228.11pt; display:inline-block } FIFTH SECTION DECISION Application no. 42009/07 Yevgen Pavlovych MOROZ against Ukraine The European Court of Human Rights (Fifth Section), sitting on 6   March

margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; line-height:normal; widows:0; orphans:0; font-size:8.5pt } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial }    The European Commission of Human Rights sitting in private on 13 March

Ineta Ziemele,   Luis López Guerra,   Ann Power, judges, and Santiago Quesada, Section Registrar , Having regard to the above applications lodged on 22   February   2006, 9   March

The Moroccan and French applicants were released as they elected to leave the United Kingdom in December 2001 and March 2002, respectively.