They relied on Article 6 § 1 of the Convention.

They relied on Article 6 § 1 of the Convention.

; the decision to give notice of the complaints under Articles 6, 8 and 13 of the Convention and Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 to the Convention to the Azerbaijani Government (“the Government”) represented

Hans-Juergen Schroth, arbitre unique DEMANDERESSE AU RECOURS EN ANNULATION : LA SOCIETE CIECH SA société de droit polonais ayant son siège social : Powazkowska 46/50 01-728 -VARSOVIE - POLOGNE

The applicant complains under Articles 3, 6 and 13 of the Convention that he was subjected to inhuman treatment and that the domestic authorities failed to carry out an effective investigation into the

    Remaining complaints In application no. 42819/09, the applicant also raised other complaints under various articles of the Convention.

    Remaining complaints The applicants also raised other complaints under various articles of the Convention.

    En l’espèce, la Cour a estimé plus opportun d’examiner le grief tiré de l’article 3 de la Convention sur le terrain de l’article 8 de la Convention.

The applicants’ complaints under Article   6 § 1 of the Convention concerning the excessive length of civil proceedings and Article 13 of the Convention concerning the existence of effective domestic

Article 34 of the Convention.

They relied on Article 3 of the Convention.

of Article 27 para. 2 (Art. 27-2) of the Convention.

  1 to the Convention should be read in the light of Article 8 of the Convention but do not raise a separate complaint under that Article, while other applicants also complain under Article  

    Was the applicants’ conviction in compliance with Article 7 of the Convention?

  17599/05) delivered on 22 October 2009, in particular to the finding under Article 46 of the Convention that overcrowding in Polish prisons and remand centres revealed a structural problem, Having

The applicants’ attention was further drawn to Article 37 § 1 (a) of the Convention, which provides that the Court may strike an application out of its list of cases where the circumstances lead to the

    The case originated in applications against Russia lodged with the Court under Article   34 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (“the Convention

    ALLEGED VIOLATION OF ARTICLE 3 OF THE CONVENTION 11.

COMPLAINTS The applicants complained under Article 6 of the Convention and Article   1 of Protocol No.   1 to the Convention about the delayed enforcement of the judgments in their favour.