The Court held:   by six votes to one that there had been no violation of Article 5 § 1 (right to liberty and security) of the European Convention on Human Rights; unanimously that there had been

They had been represented by legal counsel throughout the proceedings and had made numerous submissions. There was no indication that they had been unable to present their case properly.

        Application No. 15141/89                       by Joseph

    The two applicants in both applications, Mr Joseph Zammit and Ms   Anna Busuttil, are Maltese nationals, who were born in 1944 and 1956 respectively and live in Paola.

Two of the flats have been used by tenants under the rent-control scheme. 14.

Since 30 November 1996 the applicant has been its exclusive owner. 14.

The amount will be paid to their counsel, Mr Jan Thörnhammar, who has been authorised by the applicants to receive payment on their behalf.

ADMISSIBILITY OF Application no. 10386/03 by Vojko ŽUREJ against Slovenia The European Court of Human Rights (Third Section), sitting on 16   March   2010 as a Chamber composed of:   Josep

    On 10 April 2007 the Registry requested the applicant to confirm by 16 May 2007 whether a friendly settlement had been reached in his case following the decision in Hobbs, Richard, Walsh

However, no response has been received.

Moreover, it was possible for the applicant company to claim compensation in the domestic courts, which had not been done in the present case. 9.

had been in any particular condition, such as being anxious, terrified or beaten.

The court held that the applicant had made fifty-two requests for copies of documents from his prison file which had all been approved by the prison authorities, and that he had been provided with the

    The applicant complained under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention that his civil law rights had been affected by a court judgment in proceedings in which he had not been allowed to take part

and that it had not been the defendant’s intention to defame or insult her.

The final judgment of 18   March 2005 has not been enforced to date. COMPLAINTS 1.

    Complaints   The applicants complain under Articles 9 (freedom of religion) and 11 (freedom of assembly and association) of the European Convention on Human Rights that there has been

It found the Government’s argument that the accused had not been forced to release a statement and that he had been warned about his right to remain silent to be irrelevant given the established case-law

the Convention”),   Having regard to Interim Resolution DH (97) 416, adopted on 17 September 1997 in the case of Montion against France, in which the Committee of Ministers decided that there had been

On 3 December 2007 and 30 January 2008 each of the applicants informed the Court, in writing, that the cases had been settled at the domestic level and that they wished to withdraw their applications.