The Court held by four votes to three that it was unnecessary to examine Mr Emmer-Reissig’s further complaint under Article 6.

X... est entré au service de la société Heli Ouest ; que le contrat de travail a été rompu le 14 janvier 1998 ; que le salarié a saisi la juridiction prud'homale aux fins d'obtenir la condamnation de l'employeur

  The Court held unanimously that there had been: a violation of Article 3 (prohibition of inhuman or degrading treatment) of the European Convention on Human Rights concerning the conditions of the

  The Court held unanimously that there had been a violation of Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights (freedom of expression).

  The Court held unanimously that there had been a violation of Article 2 of Protocol No. 4 to the European Convention on Human Rights (freedom of movement).

The Court held, unanimously, that there had been a violation of Article 6 § 1 and that a finding of a violation constituted sufficient just satisfaction for any non-pecuniary damage sustained by Ms Beer

  The European Court of Human Rights held, by four votes to three, that there had been no violation of Article 5 §§ 3 (right to face trial within a reasonable time or to release pending trial) and

      The European Court of Human Rights held unanimously that there had been no violation of Articles 8, 6 § 1 or 9. The judgment is available only in English.

Accordingly, the Court held unanimously that there had been a violation of Article 6 § 1 of the Convention.

With the help of a colleague, the applicant had managed to flee the country.

  It accordingly held that while in police custody Ms Yılmaz had suffered inhuman and degrading treatment which had constituted a breach of Article 3.

A hearing was held in public in the Human Rights Building, Strasbourg, on 16 March 2006.

“the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia” (no. 46447/99)   In both cases the Court held unanimously:   that there had been a violation of Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 (protection of property

He made a confession while held in police custody in the premises of the Istanbul Security Directorate.

The Court held by six votes to one that there had been a violation of Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights.

  The Court held unanimously that there had been a violation of Article 3 (prohibition of inhuman and degrading treatment) of the European Convention on Human Rights, as the conditions of the applicant

  On 28 July 1998 Alūksne District Court held that Mrs Sisojeva was entitled to apply for a passport as a “permanently resident non-citizen” and that Mr Sisojev and Aksana Sisojeva were entitled to

  In its Chamber judgment of 22 April 2004, the European Court of Human Rights held unanimously that there had been a violation of Article 8.