The applicant himself was interviewed on 23 and 28 February and 1 March 1989.

MARXER                  G.B.

The facts of the case, as submitted by the applicant, and supplemented by information provided by the Cypriot Government in reply to the Court’s related request dated 16 March 2011, may be summarised as

In the case of Matteo v.

  Therefore, given the circumstances of the case as a whole, and in particular the virginity tests carried out without any medical or legal necessity as well as the post-traumatic stress and depressive

    On 17 March 2008 the latest known decision to suspend the criminal case of 28   March   2006 was overruled. 14.

In the case of Roth v.

On 30 March 1996 the applicant’s lawyer applied to see the applicant in order to give him the Supreme Court’s decision in the case. The prison governor did not grant him permission to do so. 19.

In the case of Tsechoyev v.

Municipal de Dunkerque; qu'il ressort des éléments du dossier que l'intérêt social de la société concessionnaire résidait courant 1988 dans la réouverture du Casino de Dunkerque, après l'exécution

    The circumstances of the case The facts of the case, as submitted by the parties, may be summarised as follows.

The hearing of the case, which involved about 30 defendants, began in the Salo District Court ( käräjäoikeus , tingsrätten) on 7 March 1995.

Vu : - le code des marchés publics ; - l'ordonnance n° 2020-306 du 25 mars 2020 ; - l'arrêté du 8 septembre 2009 portant approbation du cahier des clauses administratives générales applicables aux

  The first number is the case's position on the list of cases referred to the Court in the relevant year (second number).

  The applicant   The case concerns an application brought by a Luxembourg national, Marc Thoma, who was born in 1946 and lives in Luxembourg. He is a journalist.

The circumstances of the case The facts of the case, as submitted by the applicants, may be summarised as follows.

    The circumstances of the case 2.     The facts of the case, as submitted by the applicants, may be summarised as follows. 3.

du 03 juin 1998 par le tribunal correctionnel de Nanterre à 3 000 francs d'amende pour outrage à une personne chargée d'une mission de service public ; qu'il a été placé en détention provisoire du 12 mars

Par arrêt du 21 mars 2019, la cour d'appel a rejeté l'exception de chose jugée du jugement de dessaisissement précité, en date du 5 juillet 2017, annulé la citation du 6 février 2018 ainsi que le jugement