Creditors’ claims should be met in accordance with the priority ranking set out in section 206 of the Law. 15.

(i)     Najima Boujedaine, questioned on 21 July 1998 70.

His wife Naila Chiţac expressed the wish to continue these proceedings. In its decision of 3 July 2014, the Court granted locus standi to his heir.

    On an unspecified date following the applicant's death, his mother, Mrs Nasima Mullakhmetovna Tverdokhlebova, and daughter, Ms Mariya Vladimirovna Tverdokhlebova, joined the civil proceedings

It was possible for the ban to be temporarily suspended further to a reasoned request and should it be deemed necessary (see paragraph 21 below).

Accordingly, the applications should be struck out of the Court’s list of cases. 21.

As regards application no. 41685/15, it should be struck out of the Court’s list of cases. As regards the remainder of the applications 20.

This principle requires not merely that a defendant should know the identity of his accusers so that he is in a position to challenge their probity and credibility but that he should be able to test the

The Court considers that this complaint should be examined from the standpoint of Article 6 § 1 of the Convention.

- signé par Daniel BARLOW, président de chambre et par Najma EL FARISSI, greffière à laquelle la minute de la décision a été remise par le magistrat signataire.

Greffier, lors des débats : Mme Najma EL FARISSI ARRET : - contradictoire - prononcé publiquement par mise à disposition de l'arrêt au greffe de la Cour, les parties en ayant été préalablement

    The second applicant, Mrs Naime Kaplan, married the first applicant in the early 1990s.

He then suggested that a new procedure for a sale by private agreement should be initiated, this time for 50%   of the previously requested amount. 30.

    In July 1998 a member of parliament, Naim Geylani, visited Şemdinli.

    Several times he had repeated that it was already 9 p.m. and Ms   Boujedaine should close Nancy’s cash register. 81.

While the reopening of the proceedings would be the most appropriate form of redress, should the applicants so request (ibid., § 148), it cannot fully compensate for the distress that the applicants must

it had failed to protect the movable property belonging to Borac-R (hereinafter, “the applicants’ first complaint”); and (2) that even assuming that the State could not be blamed in that respect, it should

His wife Naila Chiţac expressed the wish to continue these proceedings.

Türkiye 17/03/2020 Naim DURAL 1974 Kayseri Turkish Leman TALASLIOĞLU   16073/20 Körpe v. Türkiye 16/03/2020 Erol KÖRPE 1977 Çorum Turkish Neda BUYRUKÇU   16111/20 Erden v.