By a judgment of 18 June 2008 the Bucharest Court of Appeal allowed the applicants’ appeals and noted that the applicants’ sentences had been pardoned.

  63869/00, 14 June 2011; and De Caterina and Others v. Italy , no.   65278/01, 28 June 2011)?  

  Italy , no. 63869/00, 14 June 2011; and De Caterina and Others v. Italy , no.   65278/01, 28 June 2011)?  

  Italy , no. 63869/00, 14 June 2011; and De Caterina and Others v. Italy , no. 65278/01, 28 June 2011)?    

JUNG QU'UNE SOMME INFERIEURE A CELLE RECLAMEE EN REPARATION DU DOMMAGE ; QUE LA MACIF A INTERJETE UN APPEL PRINCIPAL ET LA DAME A...

Jung, demeurant ... (Moselle), 2°/ de Mme Z... Jung, née A..., demeurant ... (Moselle), 3°/ M.

  Italy , no. 63869/00, 14 June 2011; and De Caterina and Others v. Italy , no. 65278/01, 28 June 2011)?  

font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } FIFTH SECTION Application no. 28005/08 Linar Irekovich SALAKHOV and Aliya Fazylovna ISLYAMOVA against Ukraine lodged on 8 June

    On 17 June 1994, presumably on the applicant’s application, the contact order of 15 June 1993 was registered in the Court of Session in Scotland.

(b) CMD no. 868 of 18 June 2008 49.     By decision no. 868 of 18 June 2008 the Government allocated 17,335 hectares of agricultural land to the IkCF.

M.W.’s further applications for permission to visit the applicant of 28   May, 15 June and 15 July 2015 were dismissed by the prosecutor on 5   and 15 June and on 24 July 2015 on the grounds

The term of his detention was subsequently prolonged until 24 June 2015. On 22 January 2015 the Uzbek authorities issued final charges against the applicant.

On 9 June 2006 the applicant lodged a request to purchase the flat she occupied with the Ministry of defence.

On 7   June 2001 the police informed the applicant that his claim had been rejected.

By a decision of 30 June 2010 the Municipality annulled its previous decision of 11 March 2004.

On 17 June 2010 the Sremska Mitrovica Commercial Court opened insolvency proceedings in respect of the debtor and the applicant’s husband duly reported his claims based on the said judgment.

By registered letter of 5 June 2012 the applicant’s representative was again invited to submit, by 19 June 2012, a completed application form and additional information and documents essential to the processing

The six-month period therefore expired on 23 June 2005.

margin-bottom:10pt; padding-left:2.99pt; font-family:Arial } .s995BFA6B { margin-top:10pt; margin-bottom:5pt } RESOLUTION DH (98) 144 CONCERNING THE JUDGMENT OF THE EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS OF 9 JUNE

On 20 June 2012 the district court decided to change the custodial preventive measure in respect of the applicant by personal guarantees of her relatives. The applicant was released.