It was also decided to rule on the admissibility and merits of the application at the same time (Article   29 § 3). 4.

Petrović, a lawyer practising in the same town. The respondent Government are represented by their Agent Mr S. Carić. The facts of the case, as submitted by the parties, may be summarised as follows.

Noting that the proceedings in question had already lasted more than five years for three levels of jurisdiction and that nothing in the material submitted to it justified the period of more than three

The first three cases concern applications introduced by the applicants between 1996 and 1998 for which lasted respectively slightly more than three months (the applicant having been released after 1 month

It was also decided to rule on the admissibility and merits of the application at the same time (Article   29 § 3). THE FACTS THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE 4.

COMPLAINT The applicant submitted that the criminal proceedings against him, which had lasted six years and nine months, had not satisfied the reasonable-time requirement in Article 6 § 1 of the Convention

Certain procedures lasted several years, and one case is still pending before the domestic courts. The details of the applications appear in the attached table. B.

For the same reason, the Court is not precluded from assessing the entire length of proceedings, that is to say including the period post the Constitutional Court’s review.

Under the same provision of the Convention the applicant also complained that the trial of his case was not fair, the court was not impartial and not independent.

He also complains under the same Article that his detention on remand which lasted over five years, exceeded the “reasonable time” requirement.

On the same day the defendant co-operative lodged a counter-claim against the applicant.

It was also decided to rule on the admissibility and merits of the application at the same time (Article   29 § 3). THE FACTS THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE 4.

In the present case the applicant’s pre-trial detention, which lasted for 29   days, was based on the risk that he might influence witnesses and, in particular, the victim.

The Supreme Court quashed the Municipal Court’s judgment in respect of the above fourth of the property and, at the same time, quashed the relevant part of the District Court’s judgment of 18   September

Under Article 4 of Protocol No. 7 to the Convention the applicant complained that he was tried twice for the same offence he had been once acquitted.

the civil court, when: a) Prosecution submissions ( acusação ) have not been submitted within eight months after the crime report ( notícia do crime ) or criminal proceedings have been stalled for the same

It became final on the same day.

At that time the proceedings had lasted less than 2 years and 11 months.

On the other hand, the Court has found a violation where the detention under this provision lasted for less than two years (see Quinn v. France , 22 March 1995, Series A no.   311).

On that date the proceedings had lasted some six years and eight months after the ratification. 18.