qualité de monteur pneumatique, dans une même entreprise exploitée par trois employeurs successifs; qu'ayant perçu, à la suite de son départ en retraite le 2 janvier 1992, un capital de fin de carrière

In the case of Hambardzumyan v.

    The circumstances of the case 2.     The facts of the case, as submitted by the parties, may be summarised as follows. 1.

On 20 March 2013 the applicant called for a doctor at 11.00 a.m., at 7.10 p.m. and 8.00 p.m. requesting a painkiller ( Dimidrol ).

    In the present case the search was carried out in the context of criminal proceedings concerning the suspected forgery of works of art.

Subsequently that case was joined to criminal case no. 7806.

    D.B.’s remains were exhumed in March 2003 and the autopsy carried out in November 2003 established that “an explosive device” had been the cause of his death. 13.

[Committee], nos. 22936/16 and 52347/16, § 15, 28 March 2023). 16.

In the case of Gharibyan and Others v.

    The circumstances of the case The facts of the case, as submitted by the applicant, may be summarised as follows. On 28 May 1986 the applicant and her former husband A.P.

On 30 March 2006 a post-mortem examination was carried out on the body of the applicants’ son.

A pre-investigation was carried out but the investigators repeatedly refused to open a criminal case. The applicant unsuccessfully appealed.

RIOM, chambre correctionnelle, en date du 19 avril 2006, qui, pour infraction à la législation sur les installations classées, l'a condamnée à 8.000 euros d'amende ainsi qu'à un an d'exclusion des marchés

    The circumstances of the case 2.     The facts of the case, as submitted by the applicant, may be summarised as follows.   1.

    According to the Government, on 30 March 2004 the military commander of the Shali District drew up a report stating that on 27 March 2004 federal forces had carried out a special operation

TURKEY   (Application no. 22535/93)                     JUDGMENT     STRASBOURG   28 March 2000       In the case of

The court further decided to join the applicant’s case with the second applicant’s pending case as both cases raised similar issues. 2.

with those in the cases of Nazarenko v.

    On 5 March 2005 the Supreme Court of Chechnya, which examined the applicants’ criminal case, ordered a prosecution inquiry into their complaints of ill ‑ treatment. 31 .