. 36498/05)             JUDGMENT (Just satisfaction)     STRASBOURG   12 July 2011     FINAL   12/10/2011     This judgment has become

On the same day the judgment became final and enforceable. 6.     On 3 December 2002 the Nyuringri Town Court issued a writ of execution. 7.

xa0; (Application no. 39714/98)     JUDGMENT     STRASBOURG   26 April 2001       FINAL   26/07/2001           This judgment will become

The judgment was not appealed against and became final. 7.     On 19 December 2000 the Kirovskiy District Court issued the applicant with a writ of execution.

The judgment was not appealed against and became final. 6.     On 6 February 2004 enforcement proceedings were instituted.

The judgment was not appealed against and became final. 7.     On 1 October 2001 a writ of execution was issued. 8.

The judgment was not appealed against and became final on 28 June 2004. The lump sum was paid one month and ten days after the judgment became final.

Therefore, the act of which the applicant complained took place in July 1998, when he became aware or had to become aware that the further payment of his pension was terminated under Article 92 of the

The judgment thus became binding and enforceable on that date.

No appeal was lodged and the judgment became final. 11.     By judgment of 25 August 2001 the court awarded Mr   Pavel   Careţchi compensation of MDL 2,904 [4] .

A stamp on the Supreme Court's decision of 26 March 1997 indicates that it became final on 24 July 1998.

    Following the accident, the second applicant became disabled. On 14   December 1989 the military medical panel assessed his health loss at 100   per cent.

Became final on 7 February 2005.

The judgment became final on 24 April 2007. It appears that this decision was served on the guardian ad litem but not on H.B. B.

He is currently being held in Rome-Rebibbia Prison following his conviction, which became final in 2006, for murder and attempted murder.

The decision had become final on 15 October 2018. COMPLAINT 12 .

  The applicant complained that his continued detention had become arbitrary, particularly after the refusal of his 2001 application for release on licence.

    On 14 December 2010 the Court of Cassation quashed the judgment of the first-instance court, as the prosecution of the offence in question had become time-barred.

Law : Civil proceedings – Given that the impugned civil proceedings had ended and the present application had been communicated to the respondent Government before the 2006 Act became operational, the

After the lapse of the term of appeal the decision shall become final.”