On 24 April 2001 the Donduşeni District Court ruled in favour of the applicant and ordered the defendant to pay her 87,177 Moldovan lei (MDL) (7,531 euros (EUR) at the time).

The applicant complained under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention as well as Article 1 Protocol No. 1 about the non-enforcement of a final court decision given in his favour.

Serghides, judges, and Fatoş Aracı, Deputy Section Registrar, Having regard to the above application lodged on 11 March 2009, Having regard to the formal declarations accepting a friendly settlement of

COMPLAINT The applicant complained under Articles 6 § 1 and 13 of the Convention and Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 about the delayed enforcement of a final judgment in his favour.

  1 to the Convention concerning the quashing on the grounds of newly discovered circumstances of final domestic judgments in the applicants’ favour admissible;   4.

    Judgments in the applicant’s favour 5.

Raphaël Chambon, auditeur, - les observations de la SCP Roger, Sevaux, avocat de Mme Yahe Fatou A, - les conclusions de M.

B épouse C, à Mlle Mame Fatou C et à MM.

On 11 June 2003 the Supreme Court amended the Court of Appeal's judgment in the applicant's favour.

    The applicant complained about the non-enforcement of the judgment in his favour.

  1 to the Convention about the quashing by way of supervisory review of the judgment in his favour. He further complained under Article 6 § 1 about the excessive length of the proceedings.

Serghides, judges, and Fatoş Aracı, Deputy Section Registrar.

De Gaetano, judges, and Fatoş Aracı, Deputy Section Registrar, Having regard to the above application lodged on 13 January 2010, Having regard to the declaration submitted by the respondent Government

On 11 July 2002 the Tirana District Court ruled in the applicant's favour and ordered the ORIP to register his plots of land.

  1 to the Convention about the delayed enforcement of the binding and enforceable judgment rendered in her favour.

In their declarations they acknowledged, in each case, the lengthy enforcement of the judgment in the applicant’s favour.

    The Government acknowledged that the judgment in the applicant’s favour was not fully enforced.

Russia, The European Court of Human Rights (Third Section), sitting as a Committee composed of:   Alena Poláčková, President,   Dmitry Dedov,   Jolien Schukking, judges, and Fatoş Aracı,

    The applicant complained of the non-enforcement of the decision given in his favour on 1 August 2005.

    Decision in the applicants’ favour against the debtor company 5.