She was also heard by the domestic court dealing with her case. At the time the European Court gave its judgment, the proceedings were still pending.

Article 1 Jurisdiction of states Absence of territorial jurisdiction in respect of immigrant applicant who had voluntarily returned to his country of origin Facts – The applicant, a Pakistani national, came

DES PREMIERS JUGES QU'ELLE ADOPTE, ENONCE QU'AUCUN FAIT NOUVEAU N'ETANT INTERVENU DEPUIS L'ORDONNANCE DE NON-CONCILIATION, IL CONVENAIT DANS L'INTERET DES ENFANTS COMMUNS D'EN MAINTENIR LA GARDE A LA MERE

Case Judgment of Final on 54558/11 FATİH ÇAKIR AND MERVE NİSA ÇAKIR 05/06/2018 05/09/2018   The Committee of Ministers, under the terms of Article 46, paragraph 2, of the Convention for the Protection

Case Judgment of Final on 34060/12 MERCE 07/05/2020 07/05/2020   The Committee of Ministers, under the terms of Article 46, paragraph 2, of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental

Case Judgment of Final on 19986/06 İLBEYİ KEMALOĞLU AND MERİYE KEMALOĞLU 10/04/2012 10/07/2012   The Committee of Ministers, under the terms of Article 46, paragraph 2, of the Convention for the Protection

SUR LE PREMIER MOYEN DE CASSATION, PRIS PAR I... ET LES CONSORTS H...

It was legitimate to expect that the national authorities to which the case had been referred would verify whether and to what extent the failings established in the present case remained compatible with

REJET ET CASSATION PARTIELLE SUR LES POURVOIS FORMES PAR : 1° X... (CLAUDE), PREVENU ; 2° Y...

JOSEPH ET FRANCINE, CETTE DERNIERE, MERE DE DAME E..., ET QUE CONSTANT ET EMILE D... N'AVAIENT DONC QUE LA SIMPLE QUALITE DE G...

AVAIT CEDE SES PARTS DE LA SOCIETE TRAGENIR A SA MERE ; QUE Y... EST DECEDE LE 1ER JANVIER 1978, LAISSANT POUR UNIQUE HERITIERE CELLE-CI, NEE X...

Case name Lodged on Applicant Year of Birth Place of Residence Nationality Represented by 1. 45611/22 Aksoy v.

Likewise, in the instance case, the delays and the non-implementation of appropriate desegregating measures could not be considered as having had an objective and reasonable justification.

The case came before the County Court on 9 April 2008.

However, in the Court’s opinion, the mere reopening of the case had not been sufficient to deprive the applicant of his victim status.

POUR L'APPLICATION DES CONDITIONS DE RESSOURCES, LE DROIT EST EXAMINE POUR CHAQUE PERIODE DE DOUZE MOIS DEBUTANT LE 1ER JUILLET, EN FONCTION DE LA SITUATION DE FAMILLE A CETTE DATE ; QU'ENFIN, EN CAS

CASSATION SUR LE POURVOI DE LA DAME X...

LA COUR, VU LES MEMOIRES PRODUITS TANT EN DEMANDE QU'EN DEFENSE ; SUR LE MOYEN UNIQUE DE CASSATION, PRIS DE LA VIOLATION DES ARTICLES 357 DU CODE PENAL ET 593 DU CODE DE PROCEDURE PENALE, AINSI QUE DE