While Article 6 states a general rule that civil proceedings, inter alia, should take place in public, it is not inconsistent with that provision to designate an entire class of case as an exception

At the hearings some of the parties did not appear since the District Court had failed to summon them in accordance with the procedural rules.

No violation of Art. 6-1 with regard to disciplinary proceedings;Violation of Art. 6-1 with regard to administrative proceedings and criminal proceedings;Pecuniary damage - claim dismissed;Non-pecuniary

Violation Art. 8 in conjunction with Art. 14;Violation Art. 6 in conjunction Art. 14

Violation Art. 10;No violation Articles 14 and 18 read in conjunction with Art. 10

    It follows that this part of the application must be declared inadmissible in accordance with Articles 34 and 35 §§ 3 and 4 of the Convention. 2.

However, as the roads were blocked with panzer tanks, she could not go back there.

   After declaring the case admissible, the Commission, acting in accordance with Article 28 para. 1 (b) of the Convention, also placed itself at the disposal of the parties with a view to securing

    On 28 March 1991 the applicant lodged a motion with the Oleśno District Court, claiming a division of inheritance and dissolution of co-ownership of a certain property. 6.

Security Directorate at the relevant time, with inflicting ill-treatment on the applicants.

    On 17 October 1994 the applicant filed a petition for review with the Supreme Court. 18.

(a) correspondence with the Commission – no reasons had been disclosed or substantiated which could justify the control of the applicant’s correspondence with a Convention organ, the confidentiality of

    On 30 April 1999 the applicant filed a petition for review with the Supreme Court, which on 29 December 2000 upheld the Regional Court’s judgment.

He submitted that the second set of the proceedings had ended with the Supreme Court’s decision of 14 October 1998. 23.

To this end, he organised with the support of his adherents a demonstration on the old Airport square.

He shared this cell with three other persons. Two slept on temporary beds, two others on the floor. He was provided with a foam mattress.

    The applicants' petition for review of 21 September 1998 was dismissed by the Supreme Court on 18 May 2000, the final judgment having been delivered in accordance with the law. 19.

    On 11 March 1998 the applicant lodged a cassation appeal against this judgment with the Supreme Court ( Sąd Najwyższy ). 26.

#Hermann Wite pret Eiropas Parlaments.#Lieta C-188/83.

(a) disclosure: Reporting on court proceedings is perfectly consonant with the requirement under Article 6 that hearings be public.