The second applicant was advised to request legal representation again for the adjudication hearing, which he did on 31 March 1997. 20.

The applicant, who had just been informed that, with effect from 1 April 1971, he had been demoted to the rank of private, again left the barracks in the evening and went home.

He was also advised to request legal representation again for the adjudication hearing, which he did on 31 March 1997. 27.     The adjudication hearing was reconvened on 11 April 1997.

7 (right not to be tried or punished twice), Mr   Zolotukhin complained that, after he had already served three days’ detention for committing disorderly acts, he had been re-detained and tried again

    By a letter of 9 January 2017, Dr Bisi again refused to give the Parliamentary Commission of Inquiry any list.

He told Inspector D.B. that they could not deport him as he had expired documents and that he refused to be detained again. He also noted that judicial proceedings were pending.

#xa0;  On 15 May 1994 the Hajdú-Bihar County Police Department (Hajdú- Bihar Megyei Rendorfokapitányság Bunügyi Igazgatóság Vizsgálati Osztálya) arrested the applicant on the strong suspicion (alapos

In a report dated 24 January 1994, Dr F opined that, if G were to have to face the stress of cross-examination again, he would be likely to break down and give unreliable answers and statements.

    On 27 March 2003 the applicant again sought the replacement of Ms   T.

Mr G.C. and Mrs   M.C. were once again present as the “foster parents”. 69.

In October 2016 she fell again, hit her forehead and was taken to the accident and emergency department.

When the shop’s alarm had gone off, he had taken the money and run away. 10 .

On 16 December 2003 the applicant was convicted of disorderly behaviour or using threatening/abusive/insulting words likely to cause harassment, alarm or distress and fined GBP 50.00.

    On 23 October 2009 the municipal authorities again notified the first applicant of their decision of 14 April 2008 (see paragraph 19 above).

    On 10   January 2019, again on his Facebook page, the applicant posted a hyperlink to a press article headed “A prosecutor sounds the alarm.

He noted that in March 2006 health care specialists had pointed out “over and over again” ( eilinį kartą ) that the cells lacked sanitary units as well as natural light, although the artificial lighting

The Re-Hearing On 26 November 2002, following argument by both parties, the High Court gave judgment for Mr Loutchansky again, holding that neither of the articles was protected by qualified privilege.

We urge your court once again to take account of the urgency of the situation and we request you to indicate an interim measure.”

The first applicant said that he had reported these events to the director of the orphanage, E., who had assured him that she would call the police if it happened again. 9.

Again, since “whistle-blower” legislation does not exist in Austria, the above citation from section 7 of the Media Act provides a direct path to a similar outcome.