Having regard to its findings above concerning the applicant's having had “possessions” in this case and their victim status, the Court considers that the nullification of their property title amounted

Since there had been no formal expropriation and they had not been paid compensation the applicants issued proceedings for damages for the unlawful occupation of their land.

    At the hearing of 4 February 2009, the applicants, then represented by lawyer S.D., changed their plea and claimed that they had been pushed to commit the offence by the investigators, who

The applicants retained copies of a number of their complaints and the authorities' replies and submitted them to the Court.

They submitted that they had eventually been informed by their lawyer, following the receipt of information submitted by the Government to the Court in the context of the application of Rule 39 of the

by the applicants and there was no reason to doubt their independence, the prosecuting authorities had then not given enough reasons for their decision. 20 .

They then left the shop, went to the rental car parked nearby, where the applicant was waiting for them, and fled. 11.

They moved into a rented house but were unable to adapt to these conditions. They gave up their tenancy when offered two plots for the family at Cottingley Springs.

, ayant donné lieu au jugement du 27 mars 2013 a été formée par la société Sea's Theme alors que la demande formée devant la cour d'appel a été formée par la société Sea's Theme représentée

In the view of the Minister, they could find refuge in a different part of the country, without letting their family know that they had returned.

They were subject to an order of the Director (“the Director”) of the SIS no. 39/1996 which forbade them to report the recommencement of their “service” to the Agency so that their affiliation with the

During this operation they kicked the ninth applicant, who was therein, with their legs. 3.

It seems that it was then discovered that the applicant had in fact had a false pregnancy. In the meantime the applicants appealed against their detention to the Sofia District Court.

He explained that they [F. and B.] shot the victim, at least twice, shortly after their arrival at the venue and then the three of them ran off.

Their fingerprints were then taken; the applicants offered no resistance as they had seen other migrants being slapped on the back of the head for doing so. 14.

As regards Article 14 (Art. 14), the Government note that the applicants added this complaint in their observations and that they had no opportunity to answer it.

Following this, the authorities had harassed the family in different ways, inter alia , by creating administrative problems for them (their apartment had not been repaired, they had been prohibited from

They told them they were their neighbours. As the applicants hesitated, they broke down the unlocked front door and entered by force. Upon entering the forest ranger placed a balaclava on his head.

They had an agreement with the Government of Quebec which permitted them to sign commitments under which they retained responsibility for refugees during their first year in Canada.