On 9 October 2007 the applicant was taken into police custody on suspicion of disseminating propaganda in favour of the PKK.

By the final judgment of 4 June 2009, the High Court of Cassation and Justice held in favour of the applicants, establishing their right to receive damages from the State budget.

By 12 May 2004 the judgment in the applicant’s favour was enforced.

The applicant was charged with the offence of disseminating propaganda in favour of a criminal organisation and its purposes proscribed by Article   220   (8) of the Criminal Code.

  3713) proscribing disseminating propaganda in favour of a terrorist organisation. The court then sent the file to Adana Assize Court.

Tribunale di primo grado - Appalti pubblici di servizi - Bando di gara concernente un contratto quadro multiplo per l'assunzione di esperti a breve termine incaricati di fornire assistenza tecnica a favore

Interpretazione dell'art. 119 CE (gli artt. 117-120 del Trattato CE sono stati sostituiti dagli artt. 136 CE-143 CE) e delle direttive 75/117/CEE e 76/207/CEE - Accordo collettivo che prevede un assegno a favore

    The judgments in the applicants' favour remain unenforced. II.     RELEVANT DOMESTIC LAW 10.

    The applicant complained that the judgment in his favour remained unenforced.

On 5 July 2001 the District Court found in favour of the applicant ( Рiшення Московського Районного Суду м. Харкова ).

    The Court notes that the judgment in the applicant's favour remained unenforced for seven years and four months. 20.

    All the applicants were parties to civil proceedings in which the first ‑ instance and appeal courts found in their favour.

/02070 - N° Portalis DBVM-V-B7I-MIW3 N° Minute : C5 Copie exécutoire délivrée le : à : la SELARL CABINET LAURENT FAVET

di diritto pubblico – Articoli 2, 9 e 13 della direttiva 2006/112/CE – Cooperazione intercomunale – Delega di gestione – Associazione incaricata della gestione – Prestazioni di servizi telematici a favore

In October 1999 the First Deputy of the President of the Supreme Court suspended the execution proceedings relating to the judgment in favour of the first applicant.

- 80982/12   Article 1 of Protocol No. 7 Removal decided by court on the basis of classified documents concerning national security that were not disclosed to the applicants: relinquishment in favour

Ukraine lodged on 29 October 2019 communicated on 5 September 2023 SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE The application concerns the non-enforcement of a final and binding judgment adopted in the applicant’s favour

    Was the court decision in the applicant’s favour enforced fully and in due time?   2.

The applicant complains under Articles 10 and 13 as to the impossibility to obtain enforcement of the final judgment of the Kyiv Circuit Administrative Court of 17 September 2015 delivered in his favour