His wife was unemployed. In consequence, the applicant submitted that he could not bear the court fees without serious harm to the well-being of his family.

It was claimed that his participation at this stage would render him a judge in his own cause and offend against the rule of impartiality. However, the objection was rejected.

If the witness agreed to leave, in no case could he be arrested or intercepted for an act pre-dating his appearance during his obligatory stay in the place where the judge examining him exercised his duties

In any event, the nature of his claims was such that his personal presence was indispensable for proper examination of his claims. 2.     The Court's assessment 59.

On 13 July 2007 the Płock Regional Court invited him to submit a statement of his financial means in support of his request. 50.

at the crime scene ... together with his Fiat Tipo car ..., as well as his presence at the N.C’s family, 40 days after his death, create the conviction for the court that he acted as an accomplice, an

Consequently, his departure was not “voluntary” in terms of his free choice.

  On 15 November 2002 the applicant submitted his comments. 17.

complaints about the breaches of his right to a fair hearing and his right to freedom of assembly because of the refusal of the Chişinău Regional Court to entertain his request for annulment and to decide

  On 4 November 1993 his counsel informed the Court that he upheld his appeal and that he intended to amend his submissions.

As to the applicant’s reliance on his right to respect for his family life within the meaning of Article 8 of the Convention in the Netherlands with his spouse, their children and one grandchild born in

He never received a reply to his letters. 14.

represented by his lawyer. 9 .

his private life.

    Everyone has the right to respect for his private and family life, his home and his correspondence. 2.

On 26 May 1997 the applicant extended his action.

On 4 February 1998 the applicant requested the exclusion of the Regional Court judges dealing with his case.

    The applicant responded that his complaints to the Ombudsman and to the regional prosecutor had been fruitless because they had not reviewed his arguments, heard his submissions, examined

dispute, and about the repercussions of such a decision on his ability to lodge a timely unemployment benefit claim.

    New charges against the applicant and his acquittal 9 .