The Court is therefore satisfied that the applicants have been afforded adequate redress and can no longer claim to be victims of a violation of their rights under Article 3 of the Convention, insofar

Moldova (application nos. 8721/05, 8705/05 and 8742/05) The applicants, Viorel Istratii, Alexandru Burcovschi and Roman Luţcan, are Moldovan nationals who were born in 1971, 1970 and 1976, respectively

Article   3.9(2) of the CAO administrative arrest cannot be imposed on women with children under the age of fourteen, but can be imposed on men having children under the same age (compare to Alexandru

considered as a deprivation of liberty within the meaning of Article 5 § 1 f) of the Convention, it pursued the aim of prevention of unauthorised entry into the country, and its period cannot be said to have

    check citizens’ identity documents if there are sufficient grounds to suspect that they have committed a criminal or administrative offence or have fled from justice; and search citizens

The media have a vital role in publicly exposing misconduct in a democratic society governed by the rule of law.

The results of the examination of his appeal have not been made available to the Court by either party to the proceedings. 56.

In his submission, it was of fundamental importance to have Ms K. examined in open court. 55.

Against this background, this court finds that all the statutory conditions for application of the General Amnesty Act have been met ...” 18.

In that complaint Mr Golovkin sought to have the seizure of the first consignment of alcohol declared illegal.

Nor was the court’s decision based on witness statements which the applicant company could not have examined during the proceedings. 2.

In addition, the applicant could not have had “legitimate expectations” of keeping those amounts. 49.

Mr Ter-Petrosyan, who was also at the square, addressed the demonstrators: “We see that police forces have arrived at the square.

One would have to take into account possible problems for her in the event of a return to Norway.

Some of them are detained and some of them have not yet been identified. [The applicant], if released, would have an opportunity to interfere with the administration of justice.” 16.

The applicants had not relied on any specific fact that could have led the authority to consider Serbia unsafe in their regard.

    On 13 March 2012 the applicants requested the FMO to have the proceedings reopened and to grant them asylum in Switzerland.

    The applicant argued that granting him leave to take part in the appeal hearing would not have delayed the proceedings, since he could have taken part in the hearing by means of video link

Lastly, the applicants could have claimed damages in civil proceedings. 81.