(disclosing his first name and using an initial for his surname) had been indicted for five counts of sexual abuse of children and one count of child abuse for alleged incidents in a primary school.

On 9 September 2009 the District Court of Tampere ( käräjäoikeus, tingsrätten ) convicted the applicant of two counts of aggravated tax fraud concerning the periods from 2000 to 2006 and 2001 to 2007 and

On   29   March 2010, the High Court judge stayed the proceedings on the basis that the applicant was imminently to be assessed for the next course at HMP Wymott due to commence in June 2010.

Court and the Court of Appeal.

AU NOM DU PEUPLE FRANCAIS LA COUR DE CASSATION, CHAMBRE COMMERCIALE, FINANCIERE ET ECONOMIQUE, a rendu l'arrêt suivant : Statuant tant sur le pourvoi principal que sur le pourvoi incident :

question à la cour. 15.

The Court of Appeal further noted that the applicant had not objected (Article 333 §§ 1 and 2 of the CCP) to the County Court’s decision of 8 July 2010 by which the court had ordered that the case be examined

As regards the trial court’s use of the statements made by B., K. and Ya. the Supreme Court acknowledged that the trial court’s failure to obtain the witnesses’ attendance amounted to a violation of the

    In the course of the investigation, the applicant's detention was prolonged on several occasions, namely by the Katowice Regional Court's decisions of 16 January, 20 March and 8 September

The court stated that, first, no appeal lay against the Supreme Court decision of 24 January 2001 and, secondly, it lacked jurisdiction to review the higher court’s reasoning.

    Since the applicant was unable to obtain redress before the Constitutional Court, the Court concludes that, as to the period of the proceedings following the Constitutional Court's decision

LA COUR DE CASSATION, PREMIÈRE CHAMBRE CIVILE, a rendu l'arrêt suivant : Sur le moyen unique : Attendu, selon l'arrêt attaqué (Colmar, 22 septembre 2011), que M.

    On 20 December 2002 the Szczecin Regional Court convicted the applicant of all the offences with which he had been charged, except for one count of intimidating a witness and one count of

circulaire d'information, mais bien d'un courrier s'appliquant spécifiquement au dossier dont le courtier avait la charge, et que le courtier, en n'attirant pas son attention sur l'ambiguïté de la position

Ultimately, the Constitutional Court also ruled against the applicant.

    On 3   November 2009 the Supreme Court quashed the judgment of the Court of Appeal, mainly because of the lower court’s incomplete examination of the facts and non-compliance with the

The Court considered that the domestic courts’ application and interpretation of the provisions of criminal law in force at the material time had not been arbitrary in any way.

On the other hand, it was decided that the enforcement of the shared custody regime which was in place be supervised by a court’s bailiff who was to report to the family court once every two weeks.

Italy - 14146/88 Judgment 23.3.1994 Article 6 Article 6-1 Reasonable time Length of proceedings in the Court of Audit: violation [This summary is extracted from the Court’s official reports (Series A or

End: date of conclusion of out-of-court settlement. Total: eleven years and one month.