He then complained that the proceedings in which he had been involved had meanwhile lasted more than ten years, and he noted that the Cantonal Administration had in fact admitted responsibility

He complained that the decision violated his professional rights and that he had not had a fair hearing.

it had applied the law in a misconceived (denkunmöglich) manner by requiring that he exploited the land himself, although this question had been irrelevant since he had already concluded a sales contract

The above-mentioned judgments had not gone into the matter whether the Department of Trade had acted abusively by cancelling the import licences of Paolo Bonnici Ltd.

  The Court of Appeal noted that the Regional Court had, in an unobjectionable manner, found that the applicant had no excuse in using his fireplace, as his alleged error relating to the requirement

It had further regard to the fact that, by judgment of 23 June 1995, the High Court had lifted the injunction against the applicant company.     COMPLAINTS   1.

She had submitted that her husband had worked from October 1950 to December 1959 as an asbestos fabric cutter in a work area where asbestos mattresses were manufactured.

whether he had intended to do so.

repealed had been enacted again, had rendered the Constitutional Court's decision of 18 March 1987 ineffective.

The appeal had also to be allowed if there was a material irregularity in the course of the trial. In any other case, the appeal had to be dismissed.

certain witnesses had been interfered with, that there had been a material irregularity and that the sentence was excessive.

  It pointed out that the applicant had very seriously violated public order and security in that he had illegally transported foreigners out of Austria and had committed drug offences.

       The applicant was taken to the prison of the local court, and released after he had been interviewed.

Moreover, the applicant association's comments had been transmitted to the judge concerned.

VILA AMIGÓ     Mrs   M. HION     Mr   R. NICOLINI   12.

VILA AMIGÓ            Mrs.   M. HION              Mrs.   M.F.

  Thus, the judicial authorities had to be held responsible for delays amounting to altogether six years.

in his business venture, he had been deprived of future profits and he had lost his prospective partners, who had been about to participate in his investment.

she had been kept awake by a member of the staff.

Later that year, the applicant became aware that one of the teenage children in his care had taken an interest in pornography and had videotaped a sex orientated film.