Using curse words, they told the villagers that the village would be evacuated at once with no possibility of return. The applicants took what they were able to carry with them and left the village.

They   sought more time to try and settle their debts as their son had agreed to purchase the property at Omer Avenue from them for a sum which would have allowed them to satisfy their creditors.

Finally, on 10 June 1992, the children were placed in emergency foster care on the demand of their mother who said that, if they were not removed from her care, she would batter them.

       On 5 May 1995 they were questioned by the Public Prosecutor at the Istanbul State Security Court. In their questioning they denied their statements made to the police.

The essence of their complaints before the Court, however, has less to do with these claims not being honoured by the debtor than with there being absolutely no legal possibility of them being enforced

There are exceptions to this principle, but they must not infringe the rights of the defence; as a general rule, paragraphs 1 and   3   (d) of Article 6 require that the defendant be given an

According to the applicants, this is a 45 m² flat in a municipal hostel where they moved in with the whole family which by then counted 11 persons.

    The applicants alleged, in particular, that the failure to issue them with documents necessary for registering their church had violated their rights under Articles 6 § 1, 9 and 11 of the

    On 28 October 2021 the Registry of the Court sent a letter to the applicants, asking them whether there were any relevant developments in the criminal proceedings against them and in the

They invoke Article 13 of the Convention, claiming that there is no effective domestic remedy available to them whereby they could have their allegations under Articles 2 and 3 examined.

Without elaborating further, they were of the view that the applicants had abused their right of individual petition. 32.

This man then carried on to the white car and got into the driver's seat.

They were entitled under the law to serve until their retirement at the age of 65. The Court delivered a judgment in the case of Scholz AG v.

Their application was lodged on 16   February 2009. They were represented before the Court by Mr D.Y. Kozyrev, a lawyer practising in Velikiye Luki, the Pskov Region. 2.

They requested that the Welfare Office keep them informed of any developments. 20.

   The applicants under Article 6 (Art. 6) of the Convention that they were deprived of their right to a fair trial since the criminal proceedings brought against them were based on their confessions

them in this application, they could not be discussed here.

In this connection they submit that both the prosecutor who questioned them at the end of their police custody and also the prosecutor who participated throughout the trial were aware of the medical reports

They did not exchange the money and in the evening went back to Stavertsi. At about 10.45 p.m. they went to sleep. Their aunt, Ms T.L., was sleeping in the adjoining room. 8.