He further complained under Article 7 of the Convention that at the time of his conviction the acts which had given rise to his conviction had ceased to be classified as “aiding and abetting an illegal

No. 4 to the Convention; (m)   the alleged existence of an administrative practice targeting Crimean Tatars, in violation of Article 14 of the Convention, taken in conjunction with Articles 8, 9,

    Before the Court the applicant complained that his conviction and sentence had been in breach of Article 7 of the Convention and of Article   2 of Protocol No. 4 to the Convention.

COMPLAINTS The applicant complained under Article 8 of the Convention that his deportation to the United States of America was a disproportionate interference with his right to respect for his private

She relied on Article 2 of the Convention. THE LAW Admissibility 1.     Submissions by the parties 49.

THE LAW ALLEGED VIOLATION OF ARTICLE 6 §§ 1 AND 3 (d) OF THE CONVENTION 38.

They relied on Article 6 § 1 of the Convention. THE COURT’S ASSESSMENT 15.

Lastly, they alleged a violation of Article   14 of the Convention in respect of their grievances under Articles   6 and 8 of the Convention and Article   1 of Protocol No.

    The second applicant complains under Article 5 § 4 of the Convention that he had no effective procedure for review of the lawfulness of his detention during the trial stage.

COMPLAINTS The applicant complained under Article 3 of the Convention that he had not received adequate medical assistance in detention and under Article 5 §   3 of the Convention that his detention

disadvantage in respect of their complaints under Article 10 of the Convention.

    ALLEGED VIOLATION OF ARTICLE 6 § 1 OF THE CONVENTION 40.

    APPLICATION OF ARTICLE 41 OF THE CONVENTION 49.

It follows that this complaint is manifestly ill-founded and must be rejected in accordance with Article   35 §§   3 and   4 of the Convention. 3.

Under the provisions of Article 29 § 3 of the Convention, it decided to examine the merits of the application at the same time as its admissibility. THE FACTS 4.

This Article shall not prevent states from requiring the licensing of broadcasting, television or cinema enterprises. 2.

ayant fait l'objet de conventions avec l'ESF de Megève, structure agréée par le directeur régional de la jeunesse et des sports et notamment une convention de stage pédagogique en situation du 20 décembre

sans se livrer à une exécution déloyale de son contrat de travail, la cour d'appel a privé sa décision de base légale au regard des articles L. 120-4, L. 121-1 et L. 122-4 du Code du travail ; 4 /

in particular the complaint under Article 6 of the Convention.