The applicant complains under Article 8 of the Convention that the decision to refuse his residence permit violated his right to respect for private and/or family life, as it deprived him of any legal

Relying on Articles 10 and 13 of the Convention and Article 18 of the Convention in conjunction with Article 2 of Protocol No. 4 to the Convention, they also complain that the imposition of travel bans

They refer to Articles 6, 8 and 13 of the Convention. QUESTIONS TO THE PARTIES 1.

    As to Article 13 of the Convention 30.

elapsed without the case having been brought before the European Court of Human Rights, in pursuance of Article 48 (art. 48) of the convention;   Whereas in his application lodged on 22 January 1976

They relied, expressly or in substance, on Article 6 § 1 of the Convention and on Article   1 of Protocol No. 1 to the Convention.

The applicants’ attention was drawn to Article 37 § 1 (a) of the Convention, which provides that the Court may strike an application out of its list of cases where the circumstances lead to the conclusion

The applicants’ various complaints under Article 5 of the Convention were communicated to the Turkish Government (“the Government”), who submitted observations on the admissibility and merits.

for his private life alleging violation of Article 8 (art. 8) of the Convention and that he had suffered discrimination within the meaning of Article 14 (art. 14) of the Convention on the grounds of sex

Włodzimierz Olewnik («   les requérants   ») ont saisi la Cour le 14 avril 2015 en vertu de l’article 34 de la Convention de sauvegarde des droits de l’homme et des libertés fondamentales («

née le 06 Mai 1963 à VAISON LA ROMAINE (84110) ... 84110 VAISON LA ROMAINE représentée par la SCP FONTAINE-MACALUSO JULLIEN, avoués à la Cour INTIMÉE : CRÉDIT LYONNAIS-LCL poursuites et diligences

ALLEGED VIOLATION OF ARTICLE   11 OF THE CONVENTION 7.

ALLEGED VIOLATION OF ARTICLE   11 OF THE CONVENTION 7.

    The applicants complain under Article 6 §§ 1 and 3 (d) of the Convention about inability to obtain attendance and examination of defence witnesses 6.

The applicant’s complaints under Article 10 of the Convention concerning the prison administration’s refusal to hand over to him various publications sent by post, were communicated to the Turkish Government

In a few cases they also raised grievances under Articles 6 and 14 of the Convention. THE LAW 1.

    The applicants submitted other complaints under Articles 6, 8, 13, 14 of the Convention and Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 to the Convention. THE LAW 7.

This complaint may raise an issue under Article 8 of the Convention.

The applicants in cases nos. 76762/13, 10923/15 and 47886/15 also raised other complaints under various articles of the Convention.