The present application had been introduced in 2008 more than six years after Armenia’s ratification of the Convention and its entry into force in 2002 and, at the time of introduction, more than fifteen

The applicant had received twice-weekly visits from a doctor, a once-monthly visit from a priest and very frequent visits from one or more of his 58 lawyers, including his representative in the proceedings

The applicants allege that the police encouraged the crowd to destroy more Roma property in the village.

On 22 July 2008 a report of one more forensic examination which had been ordered in September 2006 was delivered.

Lastly, it should be noted that the new [Criminal] Code constitutes the more lenient law in this particular case.

the money obtained from their sale; File no. 16823/233/2010 6,000     7873/20 28/01/2020 Carmen-Rodica GRUSEA 1974     Rupea District Court, 03/06/2016 03/06/2016   pending More

As her life was becoming more and more unbearable, she had decided to leave the country and join her husband in the Netherlands.

  Period to be taken into consideration Proceedings brought more than fifteen years before and still pending. B.

-     Did the applicant act in good faith and in the belief that the information was true, that it was in the public interest to disclose it and that no other, more discreet means of remedying

More specifically: (a) Was it prescribed by law? (b) Did it pursue a legitimate aim? If yes, what was that aim? (c) Was the measure complained of necessary in a democratic society?

text-align:center } .s7ED160F0 { text-decoration:none } .s3DC36BA9 { font-family:Arial; text-decoration:underline; color:#0069d6 } Note d’information sur la jurisprudence de la Cour 10 Septembre 1999 Moore

-     Did the applicant act in good faith and in the belief that the information was true, that it was in the public interest to disclose it and that no other, more discreet means of remedying

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 18 May 2000 Moore

Although more time had passed since that judgment, the Supreme Court saw no reason for reducing the sentence.

of or inadequate hygienic facilities 5,000     41101/15 28/10/2015 Bogdan-Eugen Nițoi 16/05/1978     Mărgineni, Rahova, Jilava, Ploiești, Găești Penitentiaries 09/08/2010 pending More

    Noting that the applicant’s complaint regarding his detention in Craiova Prison from 19 December 2012 to 4 July 2013 was lodged with the Court on 28 August 2014, i.e. more than six months

than 3 year(s) and 11 month(s) and 26 day(s)   pending More than 3 year(s) and 10 month(s) and 16 day(s)   pending More than 3 year(s) and 10 month(s) and 7   day(s)   pending More

than 6 year(s) and 6 month(s) 2 level(s) of jurisdiction 1,800     33309/23 03/08/2023 Tetyana Vitaliyivna VOYTENKO 1982 Shkuridin Yevgen Yevgenovych Kyiv 27/04/2018 pending More than 6 year

§ 1 The applicants, all Italian nationals, complained, relying on Article 6 § 1, about the length of criminal proceedings against them, which lasted between three years, seven months and 15 days and more