The applicant’s representative informed the Court that she had had no further contact with her client since April 2021 and that therefore she was not able to provide the Court with any information about

Eric Jasper, who was born in 1933, Raphael Rowe and Michael Davis, who were born in 1968 and 1966 respectively, and Barry Fitt, who was born in 1933.

The   latter letter was returned to the Court with a postmark stating that the addressee has moved (« вибув »).

That letter was returned to the Court on 11 April 2016 with a note that it had not been claimed.

The letter came back undelivered on 28 November 2017 with a mention “unknown”.

The applicant lodged his application with the Court on 19 October 2022.

SECTION DECISION Application no. 28135/07 Guntars JEVDOKIMOVS against Latvia The European Court of Human Rights (Fifth Section), sitting on 8   December 2015 as a Committee composed of:   Erik

In late November or early December 1995, a large team of police officers forcibly entered the applicant’s house and arrested her son, Hakan Erik.

   it shall, with a view to ascertaining the facts, undertake            together with the representatives of the parties an   &#xa0

By letter dated 21 March 2017 the Government’s observations were sent to the applicant’s lawyer, who was requested to submit observations in reply together with any claims for just satisfaction by 2 May

The applicant complained under Articles 6 and 8 of the Convention that a newspaper interfered with his private and family life and the domestic courts failed to protect him from that interference.

That last letter returned with a mention that it had not been claimed.

The case has so far been dealt with by two levels of jurisdiction. In these circumstances, the Court considers that the length of the litigation has not yet exceeded a reasonable time.

  The visit took place at the invitation of Valery Zorkin, President of the Russian Constitutional Court, and included a roundtable discussion with the judges of the Constitutional Court.

In the present case, the applicant’s representative failed to answer the Court’s requests to be informed whether she was still in contact with her client.

In the present case, the applicant’s representative failed to answer the Court’s requests to be informed whether she was still in contact with her client.

Application no. 23635/19 Zbigniew GAGAT against Poland (see appended table) The European Court of Human Rights (First Section), sitting on 8   September 2022 as a Committee composed of:   Erik

    On 25 April 2017 the representative informed the Registry that he had been unable to re-establish contact with the applicant.

On 30 July 2015 the Court received a letter from the applicant asking the Court to provide him with a lawyer.

  45084/14, § 71, 12   November 2019; and Erik Adamčo v. Slovakia , no. 19990/20, § 76, 1   June 2023)?