l'environnement, le projet étant susceptible de porter atteinte à des zones humides ; - le schéma de cohérence territoriale (SCoT) du Born est illégal en tant qu'il identifie les hameaux de Cabougnon et de Louse

Rule 102 of the Court Rules provides for the possibility to reconstruct a case file if a particular case file or part of it has been lost, damaged or destroyed.

Against this background, the Court considers that the applicant has lost interest in pursuing the application.

Since it eventually lost the case and was ordered to pay the costs of the proceedings, it could have realistically been exempted from paying such costs if it had lodged such a complaint and such complaint

that the Llaw was contrary to the principles of equality and non-discrimination guaranteed by the Constitution, particularly the requirements to have been a Belgian national on 1 January 2003, to have lost

The first applicant lost his parents and brother and sister in the catastrophe while the other applicants all received injuries.

Since a constitutional amendment in 1995, only members of parliament whose words or deeds had caused the dissolution of a party had lost their parliamentary mandate.

In these circumstances, the Court finds that the applicant has lost interest in pursuing the case, as understood by Article 37 § 1 (a) of the Convention, and that there are no general issues concerning

      In the light of the above, in accordance with Article 37 § 1, c of the Convention, the Court now considers that the applicants have lost interest in their application.

On 3   April   1998 the applicant brought an action in the Trostyanets District Court of the Sumy Region (hereafter “the District Court”), claiming that her former husband, Mr L., had lost the

Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 – The Court considered that the applicants could argue that they had a “legitimate expectation” that their claim to repayment of the lost income from the property would be realised

In these circumstances, having regard to Article 37 § 1 (a) of the Convention, the Court concludes that the applicant has lost interest in her application and no longer intends to pursue it before the

In 2009 the applicant was informed by the SIZO authorities that his medical file had been lost. On 11 May 2010 the applicant was transferred to Slovyanoserbsk Correctional Colony.

On 9 June 2009 the Administrative Court decided to declare void the order of 23 February 2009 and awarded the applicant compensation for lost earnings starting from 23 February 2009 until the date on which

This judgment was reversed on 22 November 2007 by the Sisak County Court ( Županijski sud u Sisku ) on the ground that Z.K. had not lost her specially protected tenancy since it had been returned to her

Relying on Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 to the Convention, the applicant complained that during a search of her home some of her personal belongings were damaged or lost.

Consequently, the applicant lost his disability allowance and was now dependent on his children.

The prosecutor’s office asked a court to invalidate the union’s formation but lost.

THE LAW The Court notes that the applicant lost contact with his representative and he had not provided him with any instructions for responding to the Government’s friendly ‑ settlement proposal