After their return, they placed F. in the same compartment as the applicant’s son and moved off to the Kotovskiy District Department of the Interior of the Volgograd Region.

Subsequently, a complaint was lodged against the applicant by a private individual in respect of the same offence.

By the same letter the applicants’ representatives informed the Court also that the applicant Elif Koca had died on and that her heirs Mevlüt Koca and Mehmet Koca wish to pursue the application.

August, 1963 on the ground that the action, although now lodged in proper form was, in any event, too late as the time-limit had already expired.

(a)     Legitimate aim – The aims of the applicant associations were to defend and promote the rights of LGBT people, including the right to same-sex marriage.

On the same day the court issued the search warrant, which provided as follows: “...In accordance with Article 13 of the Code on the Establishment and Procedures of State Security Courts and Articles 86

Bulgaria (nos. 66581/12 and 25054/15, 14 May 2020), that the compensation awarded to the applicant for her land expropriated for public needs was too low.

On 28 March 2006 a judge of the Samarskiy District Court further extended the applicant’s detention with reference to the same reasons as previously.

The applicant claimed that the principle non bis in idem was infringed as he had already been prosecuted and punished for the same facts.

The undeclared income amounted in total to 500,895   euros and, consequently, the tax imposed had been 263,711.68 euros too low.

Furthermore, it was clear that the second offence arose from the same facts as the first offence.

This too provided for widows to inherit part of the pension earned by their husbands.

Frequent violent disputes arose over the TV set as too many inmates had too many preferences.

The applicant’s appeal was dismissed by the Supreme Court on the same ground.

Turkey - 47304/07 Judgment 11.1.2011 [Section II] Article 2 Positive obligations Article 2-1 Life Fatal attack on girl by stray dogs: no violation   Facts – The applicants are all members of the same

established with a degree of probability that would have made outcome of proceedings directly decisive for right relied on by applicants – connection between that right and Federal Council’s decision too

The applicant was accused of aggravated tax fraud as he had failed to declare his own income and, consequently, the tax imposed on him had been too low.

The court found that it was not necessary to hold an oral hearing as the same witnesses had already been heard by the District Court and the Appeal Court in the same matter.

But, according to the Applicant, this Court too, failed to take a decision and he received no further communication.

In view of the circumstances of the case, it found that that was too long and did not meet the “reasonable time” requirement.