His opinion which was read out at the trial was thorough and conclusive.   He had used as many handwritings for comparison as possible.

  The Court held by six votes to one that there had been a violation of Article 14 (prohibition of discrimination) of the European Convention on Human Rights, read in conjunction with Article 4 §

who watched the rehearsals but did not read the script and (iii) the defendants who read the script but did not watch the rehearsal. 22.

The former version read “Muteber Ütebay”. [2] Rectified on 30 January 2009. The former version read “Gıyasettin Ütebay”. [3] Rectified on 30 January 2009.

It reads, in so far as relevant: “1.

It reads, in so far as relevant: “1.

  209 of 4   March 1997 The relevant provisions of the above act, as in force at the material time, read as follows: “5.

    The relevant provision of the Constitution of the Republic of Azerbaijan reads as follows: Article 109.

    The relevant provisions of the CCP read as follows: Article 269 1.

The relevant extracts of the interview, whose video was submitted by the applicants in a CD-ROM, read as follows: “Host: I would like to ask about the Becchetti case.

It read further that “homosexuals now crawl like rats out of their holes and are fed 'lovingly' by politicians and church officials”.

Article 2, in so far as relevant, reads as follows: “1.

    Article 203 of the Code read: “Judgment shall be delivered immediately after the examination of a case.

Neither would such reader be inclined to interpret the actions and events described in the book in their literal meaning.

with section 24(1), read with section 24(4), read with section 24(6), read with section   24(7), of Circular Letter No. 10873 of 13 October 2015 on Naturalisation.

    Has the applicant suffered discrimination on the ground of his political views, contrary to Article 14 read in conjunction with Article 8 of the Convention?

  However, this reproach could not be comprehensible to those readers of the periodical who had not read Mr. Haider's speech, but were only attracted by the title "P.S.

Mr   E. and L.’s pre-trial statements had been read out for a well ‑ motivated reason.

The relevant part of the Minister’s decision reads as follows: “...

He relied on Article 6   §§   1 and 3 (d) of the Convention, the relevant parts of which read as follows:   “1.