That judgment became final on 21 June 2002. 7.

    The applicant’s arrest The applicant and his acquaintance I. were arrested in the refugee camp on 23 June 2004.

} .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt }     Final resolution DH (99) 344 HUMAN RIGHTS APPLICATION No. 30928/96 NUNES AGAINST PORTUGAL (Adopted by the Committee of Ministers on 9 June

(hereinafter referred to as "the convention"),   Having regard to the judgments of the European Court of Human Rights in the case of H against the United Kingdom, delivered on 8 July 1987 and 9 June

By letters dated 25 June 2008, 9 September 2008 and 5 June 2009, sent by registered post, the applicant was notified that the period allowed for submission of the his observations had expired on 23 April

The observations were forwarded to the applicant’s representative, who was invited to submit observations in reply by 10 June 2014.

  Article 5 § 1 (extract)   – “… the applicant’s release was ordered at 9.15 am on 4 June 1998.

Arial; font-style:italic } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } Resolution ResDH(2003)109 concerning the judgment of the European Court of Human Rights of 20 June

s76CF415B { page-break-before:always; clear:both } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt }   Resolution ResDH(2000)154 concerning the judgment of the European Court of Human Rights of 22 June

margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:justify } Final Resolution ResDH(2002)80 Human Rights Application No. 34117/96 C.P.M. and M.O.R.M. against Portugal   (Adopted by the Committee of Ministers on 24 June

On 12   June 2012 the European Court of Human Rights found a violation (see Lindheim and Others v. Norway , nos.   13221/08 and 2139/10, 12   June 2012).

The prosecutor appealed against the judgment of 8 June 2006. On 28 September 2006 the Regional Court examined the prosecutor’s appeal and upheld the judgment of 8 June 2006.

composed of:   Danutė Jočienė, President,   Nona Tsotsoria,   Guido Raimondi, judges, and Françoise Elens-Passos, Deputy Registrar, Having regard to the above application lodged on 29 June

Arial; font-style:italic } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } Resolution ResDH(2003)168 concerning the judgment of the European Court of Human Rights of 18 June

with their positive obligations to enable the effective exercise of family ties between the applicants, a father (the first applicant) and his daughter (the second applicant), between early 2020 and June

Arial; font-style:italic } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } Resolution ResDH(2003)101 concerning the judgment of the European Court of Human Rights of 25 June

The applicant lodged an appeal (no. 231/2020) on 13 August 2020 which was dismissed by the Supreme Court on 14 June 2022.

    Rectified on 14 June 2011: “Regional” has been replaced with “City”. [9] .     Rectified on 14 June 2011: “the KRPO” has been replaced. [10] .

    Following a request filed by the applicants’ lawyer, on 15 April 2010 the Commercial Court’s decision of 3 June 2008 was served on him. 9.

In the afternoon of 5 June 1998 the applicant was examined by a doctor.