font-family:Arial; font-size:11pt } SECOND SECTION PARTIAL DECISION AS TO THE ADMISSIBILITY OF Application no. 19582/02 by Ali ÇİMEN against Turkey The European Court of Human Rights (Second Section), sitting

On 25 April 2022 the Constitutional Court, sitting as a panel of two judges, examined the applicant’s complaints under the right to liberty and security.

In that connection, national law expressly obliged judges sitting in a case to immediately inform the president of the court of the circumstances justifying his or her removal.

width:233.81pt; display:inline-block } SECOND SECTION DECISION Application no. 61636/00 by Gary Hamilton RICKETTS against the Netherlands   The European Court of Human Rights (Second Section), sitting

The applicant applied to the President of the Regional Court ( arrondissementsrechtbank ) of The Hague, sitting in Haarlem, for a provisional measure preventing his expulsion.

s5A070004 { width:213.96pt; display:inline-block }   FOURTH SECTION DECISION Application no. 14434/09 Eleni MELEAGROU and others against Turkey The European Court of Human Rights (Fourth Section), sitting

amendments had come into effect, the Arbitration Committee members had resigned in the course of two elections following public calls by the TFF president that they do so despite the fact that the sitting

   Mr Hauschildt brought various decisions taken by the City Court judge before the High Court sitting on appeal with three professional judges.

On 19 January 1998 the Regional Court sitting in private dismissed the appeal. 55.

On 19 January 1998 the Regional Court sitting in private dismissed the appeal.

dispositions de l’article R. 532-1 du code de justice administrative, de prescrire une mesure d'expertise aux fins de dresser, dans le cadre des travaux de doublement de la RD 1508 de La Balme de Sillingy

R. against Poland The European Court of Human Rights (Third Section), sitting on 21   March 2002 as a Chamber composed of   Mr   G. Ress , President ,   Mr   I.

sC1AC44A4 { width:228.11pt; display:inline-block } FIFTH SECTION DECISION Application no. 31828/03 by Katharina and Sieghard DÖMEL against Germany The European Court of Human Rights (Fifth Section), sitting

In the Court’s view, these circumstances taken as a whole served objectively to justify the applicant’s apprehension that R.W., sitting as a judge in the Administrative Appeals Commission, lacked the necessary

inline-block } .s60570E66 { width:233.81pt; display:inline-block } THIRD SECTION DECISION Application no. 35015/97 by Tomasz KRAWCZYK against Poland The European Court of Human Rights (Third Section), sitting

display:inline-block } SECOND SECTION PARTIAL DECISION AS TO THE ADMISSIBILITY OF Application no. 12605/02 by Ivo PATTA against the Czech Republic The European Court of Human Rights (Second Section), sitting

s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt }     SECOND SECTION DECISION Application no. 22079/13 Tutku YURDAKUL ENGİN against Turkey The European Court of Human Rights (Second Section), sitting

161.61pt; display:inline-block } SECOND SECTION PARTIAL DECISION AS TO THE ADMISSIBILITY OF Application no. 23126/06 by Özgür AĞDAŞ against Turkey The European Court of Human Rights (Second Section), sitting

display:inline-block } FIFTH SECTION PARTIAL DECISION AS TO THE ADMISSIBILITY OF Application no. 33551/04 by Ivan Penchev IVANOV against Bulgaria The European Court of Human Rights (Fifth Section), sitting