Denmark , judgment of 21 November 1984, Series A no. 87, p. 13, § 33, and Yildirim v. Austria (dec.), no. 34308/96, 19 October 1999).

207.46pt; display:inline-block } .sAAF48370 { width:22.55pt; display:inline-block } .sCAE120C3 { width:246.49pt; display:inline-block }     TROISIÈME SECTION     AFFAIRE HAYDAR YILDIRIM

:32.36pt; display:inline-block } .sFBBFC6C9 { width:290.51pt; display:inline-block } FIRST SECTION   FINAL DECISION   AS TO THE ADMISSIBILITY OF   Application no. 30451/96 by Selçuk YILDIRIM

display:inline-block } .sA5C4F8A9 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:left; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } THIRD SECTION FINAL DECISION Application no. 42872/98 by Ahmet YILDIRIM

/06/2017 40303/98 GÜMÜŞ ET AUTRES 15/03/2005 15/06/2005 35071/97 GÜNDÜZ MÜSLÜM 04/12/2003 14/06/2004 65849/01 GÜZEL No. 2 27/07/2006 27/10/2006 30007/96 HALIS 11/01/2004 11/04/2005 42920/98 HAYDAR YILDIRIM

inline-block } .sAAF48370 { width:22.55pt; display:inline-block } .s28D5A7B8 { width:232.45pt; display:inline-block }     DEUXIÈME SECTION DÉCISION Requête n o 50693/10 Hasan Ataman et Aydeniz YILDIRIM

particular circumstances of the present case, the Court considers it justified to give greater weight to the interests of the child than to the interest of the applicant in disproving his paternity (see, Yildirim

Turkey 12/04/2019 Yavuz YILDIRIM 15/11/1995 Istanbul Rahime AYVALI 8. 23515/19 Dağ v. Turkey 27/04/2019 Muhammed DAĞ 20/05/1995 Istanbul Rahime AYVALI 9. 24679/19 Erol v.

solid; border-left-width:0.75pt; padding-right:5.03pt; padding-left:5.03pt; vertical-align:top }       SECOND SECTION               CASE OF ÖZSOY AND YILDIRIM

       62775/10 11/10/2010 Cemal GÜVENBAŞ 01/01/1965 Ankara   Sevgi KARADUMAN             62876/10 08/10/2010 Nurten YILDIRIM

ÇETIN NAFIYE AND OTHERS 07/04/2009 07/07/2009 2858/07 CIGERHUN ONER No. 2 23/11/2010 23/02/2011 22568/05 COŞAR 26/03/2013 26/06/2013 32211/07 CÜNEYT POLAT 13/11/2014 13/02/2015 20562/07 DAĞABAKAN AND YILDIRIM

concluded that the seizure in issue involved a finding of guilt subsequent to a criminal charge; it therefore did not constitute a “penalty” within the meaning of Article 7 of the Convention (see   Yildirim

Danemark , 28 novembre 1984, § 33, série A n o 87, Nylund, précitée, Yildirim c. Autriche (déc.), n o 34308/96 , 19 octobre 1999, Krušković c.

Others 16/08/2010 Musa TETİK 1943   Hasan TETİK 1953   Aydin TETİK 1966   Bilal BEĞENDİ 1953   Cemal BEĞENDİ 1958   Nuriye AŞIK 1958   Fahriye ÇELİK 1962   Fikriye YILDIRIM

inline-block } .s7602FED2 { width:18.21pt; display:inline-block } .sC1AC44A4 { width:228.11pt; display:inline-block } SECOND SECTION DECISION AS TO THE ADMISSIBILITY OF Application no. 25327/02 by Nesrin YILDIRIM

20/12/2011 24/12/2011 26/03/2014   46541/13 Safet ORMAN 01/08/1991   Fırat Publishing House and Distribution, Employee   20/12/2011 24/12/2011 11/02/2013   46542/13 Mehmet Emin YILDIRIM

inline-block } .s7602FED2 { width:18.21pt; display:inline-block } .sC1AC44A4 { width:228.11pt; display:inline-block } THIRD SECTION DECISION AS TO THE ADMISSIBILITY OF Application no. 43610/98 by Hamdi YILDIRIM

width:46.56pt; display:inline-block } .sD49C56F { width:262.16pt; display:inline-block } FIRST SECTION   FINAL DECISION   AS TO THE ADMISSIBILITY OF   Application no. 37191/97 by Orhan YILDIRIM

s7602FED2 { width:18.21pt; display:inline-block } .s60570E66 { width:233.81pt; display:inline-block } FOURTH SECTION DECISION AS TO THE ADMISSIBILITY OF Application no. 38587/97 by Hamail BAYRAM and Şekir YILDIRIM

İsa TOPAL Şemsettin TOPAL Ali TOPAL Ayşe YILDIRIM Hüsne TOPAL Asiye TOPAL Mustafa TOPAL Hayriddin TOPAL Meryem TOPAL (Balcı) Cüneyt TOPAL         24.06.1992       &#xa0