Notwithstanding the stay of execution decision in his favour, he was not reinstated to his previous position and was appointed to the Police Academy in Samsun on a permanent basis on the grounds that his

A B un permis de construire une maison individuelle avec garage et piscine sur un terrain cadastré section D n° 791 situé lieudit Favone.

X... à Ars-les-Favets ; 2°) annule pour excès de pouvoir cette décision ; 3°) condamne l'Etat à leur payer la somme de 10 000 F au titre des frais irrépétibles ; Vu les autres pièces du dossier ; Vu le

gérance le fonds de commerce de cette dernière société à la SNTP ; que la SNTP, reprochant à la SMTRET de n'avoir pas respecté, à l'occasion d'un autre transport qu'elle lui avait confié à destination de Favonne

Law : Article   6 § 1 – The Court noted that the judgment in the applicant’s favour had remained unenforced in its entirety for almost five years.

In July 1993, the applicant requested the Council of State to order enforcement of the judgment delivered in his favour, with a daily financial penalty in default.

The Ankara Assize Court concluded that these four applicants had aided the MLKP and disseminated propaganda in its favour in a continuous manner by guiding the crowd, making people chant slogans in favour

    On 10 December 1996 the City Court found in favour of the defendants. This judgment was upheld by the High Court on 4 June 1997.

  1 in relation to the period during which the judgment in his favour remained unexecuted. 13.

  1 about the lengthy non-enforcement of the judgment in his favour.

The judgment in favour of the first applicant was not appealed and entered into force on 18 July 2006.

By another judgment of 17   December 2002 the same court delivered a similar judgment and recovered additionally RUB 121,600 in favour of the applicant. 8.

Between 18 May 2005 and 25 July 2008 the enforcement judge ( izvršni sudija ) issued three enforcement orders in favour of the applicant.

By these declarations the Russian authorities acknowledged the excessive duration of enforcement of the judgments in the applicants’ favour.

Those decisions in the applicants’ favour became final and enforceable but the State delayed their enforcement.

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

    The Court notes that the judgment given in the applicant's favour remains unenforced for seven years and eighth month. 29.

The court reheard the case, rejected the time-barred revision requests and finally upheld the judgments from 13 May and 5 July 2011 in the applicant’s favour.

    The applicant complained about the non-enforcement of the judgment in her favour.