June 1960 but the Court declared them inadmissible on .. December 1968.

On 9 June 2006 the applicant filed with the Cracow Regional Court a   claim for compensation for unlawful detention between 20 and 23   June   2005.

    Quashing of the judgment of 18   June 2003, final on 23   July 2003, on the basis of newly discovered circumstances 19.

On 26 June 1996 the District Court dismissed the plaintiffs’ action holding that the defendant Office’s procedure had been in compliance with the law.

On 25 May 1995 the court closed the case and informed the parties that the decision would be delivered on 8 June 1995. On 8 June 1995 the court decided to deliver the decision on 22 June 1995.

On 4 June 2002 the company restored electricity to the applicant’s apartment.

On 23 June 2004 the same court extended the time-limit for payment of the court fees until 15   September 2004. 6.

On 8 June 1998 the Tallinn Administrative Court upheld the applicant’s complaint against the City Government’s decision of 6 March 1998.

On 11 June 1999 a judge of the Kominternovskiy District Court remitted the case to the Kyivskiy District Prosecutor’s Office of Kharkiv for additional investigation.

Slovakia (no. 72493/10, §§ 39-56 and 58-61, 9 June 2015).

  69484/01, §§ 48 and 62, 20 June 2006).

        On 14 June 1993 the Constitutional Court (Verfassungsgerichtshof) refused to entertain the applicant's complaint against the Trial Board's decision of 25 June 1992

    On 30 June 1980, she served a notice to quit on the tenant, but he refused to leave. 11.

On 11 June 2012 a hearing took place before the disciplinary commission. The applicant’s request to call witnesses was denied.

    The Court notes that from 3   June to 12   August 2016 the applicant was kept in detention in poor conditions.

The period between 22 October 2010 and 24 June 2011 39.

    On 22 June 1993 M.S.Ö. was taken to the emergency unit of Diyarbakır State Hospital. A medical report dated 22 June 1993 referred to the following marks having been found on M.S.Ö.'

As regards Neste’s conduct from 17 June 1994 to 30 November 1995 the Competition Council found that it had not deviated to such an extent from its decision of 16 June 1994 as to justify the imposition

    Judgment of 10 June 2002 in the applicant’s favour 6.

    From 26 June 2012 to 7 June 2013 the applicant was detained in the Kyiv pre-trial detention centre (SIZO). 23 .