Turkey [GC], no. 48939/99, § 147, ECHR 2004 ‑ XII; Paul and Audrey Edwards v. the United Kingdom , no. 46477/99, § 97, ECHR 2002 ‑ II; Z and Others v. the United Kingdom [GC], no. 29392/95

The entitlement of the State Attorney's Office to seek such a nullification was clear since its role was to protect the State's interests and ensure that the laws in effect were complied with. 25.

issues of fairness of proceedings for the purposes of Article 6 of the Convention, it must consider the proceedings as a whole, including the decision of the appellate court (see, for example, the Edwards

43425/98) against the Republic of Poland lodged with the Court under Article 34 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (“the Convention”) by a Polish national, Mr Edward

becomes aware of circumstances which render the remedy ineffective, the six-month period starts from the date when the applicant first became or ought to have become aware of those circumstances (see Edwards

These persons were collectively made German nationals without their consent. [4] On 9 May 1945 the Czechoslovak territory was liberated and the Government, led by President Mr Edvard Beneš, returned from

To assess this evidence, the Court adopts the standard of proof “beyond reasonable doubt”, but adds that such proof may follow from the coexistence of sufficiently strong, clear and concordant inferences

originated in an application (no. 15484/89) against the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland lodged with the Commission under Article 25 (art. 25) on 15 June 1989 by a British citizen, Mr Edward

However, where it is clear from the outset that no effective remedy is available to the applicant, the period runs from the date of the acts or measures complained of.

announcement, no particular measures were taken, such as a separate announcement on the Regional Court's notice-board accompanied, if need be, by information about how to reach Garsten Prison, with a clear

against the Russian Federation lodged with the Court under Article 34 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (“the Convention”) by four Russian nationals, Mr Eduard

Edouard Jakhian , avocat,   Counsel ,   Mr. Jacques Crochelet , counsellor,       Youth Welfare Office,   Adviser ; - for the Commission   Mr.

applications was lodged by Mrs Marie ‑ Jeanne Chassagnou, Mr René Petit and Mrs Simone Lasgrezas on 20 April 1994, the second by Mr Léon Dumont, Mr Pierre Galland, Mr André Galland, Mr   Edouard

déclarée de la société Cross Border Lease Management Limited en tant qu'établissement financier non bancaire, est le financement en leasing, et qu'elle a pour directeur depuis le 13 décembre 2002 Nicholas Edward

the remedy ineffective, it is appropriate to take as the start of the six-month period the date when he first became aware or ought to have become aware of those circumstances (see Paul and Audrey Edwards

Court H.R., Edwards judgment of 16 December 1992, Series A no. 247-B, pp. 34-35, para. 34).   55.

knew, or ought to have known, of a real and immediate risk to the life of the individual, and whether they failed to take the necessary measures to avoid that risk (see, for example, Paul and Audrey Edwards

However, such proof may follow from the coexistence of sufficiently strong, clear and concordant inferences or of similar unrebutted presumptions of fact.

Such proof may, however, follow from the coexistence of sufficiently strong, clear and concordant inferences or of similar unrebutted presumptions of fact (see   Labita v.