He submits that because he had no personal assistant he could not benefit from daily walks and was dependent on the other inmates to be moved around the prison.

17 November 2018 and 29 January 2019 respectively SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASES Application no. 58112/18 The applicant was convicted under Article 20.2 § 1 of the Code of Administrative Offences (CAO) because

that the right to have the costs in question reimbursed had stemmed from her health insurance and the corresponding obligation of the Institute to reimburse such costs had not ceased to exist just because

for her private life, but also because the published documents had been protected by the confidentiality of the parliamentary inquiry.

On 29 March 2016 the Chișinău Court of Appeal quashed the search warrant for the applicant organisation’s headquarters, finding the search unlawful because the religious cult had no procedural standing

Altercations took place outside the first hearing because of the intensive media coverage of the case. At the December 2013 hearing the judges stood down.

He was cross-examined by the defence with regard to his competence to give characterisation of the injuries, because he was a traumatology expert.

Civil rights and obligations Appeal by local environmental protection association not in nature of an actio popularis : article 6 applicable   Access to court Ruling that appeal was inadmissible because

The applicant’s application was accompanied by the following declaration signed by the applicant: “I am not submitting any recommendation issued by a parish priest, because I am a non-believer”.

It did not award any compensation for non-pecuniary damage because the applicant had failed to make such a claim in his constitutional appeal. 8.

  The hearing of 6 October 1993 was cancelled because of the elections.   A new hearing was fixed for 26 January 1994 but was again adjourned until 18 May 1994.

The support provided to persons detained in prison psychiatric wings was inadequate and placing them in facilities outside prison often proved impossible either because of the shortage of places in psychiatric

The 30-year-old applicant has been placed under guardianship fully limiting his capacity to act because of his mild intellectual disability.

She had to repeat her request several times because her husband failed to comply with the protection orders and injunctions she had obtained.

of the accumulation of the two consecutive periods of three-day detention mentioned above before the applicant was brought before a judge;   3) violation of Article 5 § 4 because of the lack of a

During the trial, the applicant, while represented by a defence counsel, was not assisted by his guardian who had declined to continue to act as the guardian because of his own advanced age, and proceedings

      The applicant first complains that he was denied a fair hearing contrary to Article 6 para. 1 (Art. 6-1) of the Convention because the trial judge incorrectly charged the

  This was so because by accepting the motion for aggravation of the accusation, the judges had in fact formed a preconceived opinion on the case.

He contends that his detention was not covered by Article 5 because it was disproportionate and arbitrary, and because he was not given reasons for his detention.