Russia , nos. 27057/06 and 2   others, 2 July 2019, concerning permanent video surveillance of detainees and the lack of an effective remedy in that respect; Andrey Smirnov v. Russia , no.

#xa0; Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings 5,000     43965/22 18/08/2022 Vadim Vitalyevich SMIRNOV

The Court has held that repeated remittals of a case for further   investigation   may disclose a serious deficiency in the domestic prosecution system (see, for example,   Aleksandr Smirnov

Introduced on Applicant Born in Court Judgment of Quashed on 41981/08 05/07/08 Smirnov Yuriy Aleksandrovich 1930 Elektrostal Town Court 23/10/06 18/03/08 42005/08 26/07/08 Sukonkina Galina Aleksandrovna

Nikolaos Noussis, Mme Vassiliki Galitsi, Mme Vassiliki Buyuk-Apostolidou, Mme Smaro Voudri, Mme Despina Ozer, Mme Euridiki Christidou, Mme Souzana Dilopoulou, Mme Marika Soyantzoglou, M.

the observations in reply submitted by the applicants,     Having deliberated, decides as follows: THE FACTS   The first applicant is a Greek citizen born in 1931 and residing in Nea Smirni

restricted access to warm water, overcrowding Art. 13 - lack of any effective remedy in domestic law in respect of inadequate conditions of detention     38742/18 16/07/2018 Aleksey Sergeyevich SMIRNOV

delegation of the European Commission of the EEC      as regards the existence of the alleged final destination of the      meat in Tunisia i.e. the company SOC Smaroc

latter case (ibid., § 64), in the present case the Government failed to specify how many inmates had actually occupied the cells with the applicant (see, for another example, Aleksandr Vladimirovich Smirnov

principles embodied in Article 10, or to base their decisions on an acceptable assessment of the relevant facts)   7,500, to each of the applicants   57924/21 13/11/2021 Sergey Sergeyevich SMIRNOV

counterbalanced by the availability of some meaningful ex post factum judicial review procedure, as acknowledged by the Government in their observations (see paragraph   50 above; compare and contrast with Smirnov

sleeping places, lack of fresh air Art. 13 - lack of any effective remedy in domestic law in respect of inadequate conditions of detention during transport   59302/18* 20/11/2018 Artem Aleksandrovich SMIRNOV

  Smirnov, Mr   A.   Drymanov, Mr   O.   Mikhaylov, Ms   V.   Utkina, Mr   S.   Lagutkin,   Advisers.

  47863/99, 29 June 2000;   Sergey   Smirnov v.   Russia   (dec.), no.   14085/04, 6 July 2006; Lolova and Popova v.   Bulgaria   (dec.), no.

xa0;   There appeared before the Court: (a)     for the respondent Government Mr Mikhail Galperin ,   Agent , Mr Michael Swainston QC,   Counsel , Ms Iana Borisova , Mr Pavel Smirnov

Smirnov , Mr   A. Gorshkov , Mr   S. Shkodenko ,   Advisers.   The Court heard addresses by Mr Emmerson, Mr Galperin and Mr   Swainston.

Even under the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (ICC), both displacement and deportation are viewed as constituting expulsion [ se vrše u smislu protjerivanja ] from territory where persons

States to take into account the interests of the prisoner and his or her family members and to evaluate them not in terms of broad generalities but in relation to the specific situation (see Andrey Smirnov

seemed to be a regular practice (see paragraph 21 above), the Court considers that such remittals disclose serious deficiencies in the investigation being a structural problem in Ukraine (see Aleksandr Smirnov

, the Court concludes that the material conditions of his detention in Romny Prison no. 56 amounted to degrading treatment, in breach of Article 3 of the Convention (compare Aleksandr Vladimirovich Smirnov