She relied on Article 5 § 1 (e) of the Convention, which reads as follows: “1.     Everyone has the right to liberty and security of person.

The provision reads as follows: “No one shall be subjected to torture or to inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.” 31.     The Government contested that argument. A.

The third certificate, signed on 23 July 2009 by Dr B., a psychiatrist, read as follows:   “...

The appeal decision reads as follows: “The Refugee Appeals Board refers to a fill-in-the-blanks form received in its Office on 18 July 2012 and to a legal submission on your behalf received in its Office

plenary; judgment 954/1999 of the Athens Court of Appeals; judgment 1141/1999 of the Supreme Administrative Court, 1 Chamber; etc.), and it is of the opinion that the domestic courts will not fail to follow

He relied on Article 7 of the Convention, which reads as follows: “1.

    It follows that the complaint cannot be rejected for non-exhaustion of domestic remedies and that the Government’s objection must be dismissed. 3.

the appended table, Having regard to the declarations submitted by the respondent Government requesting the Court to strike the applications out of the list of cases, Having deliberated, decides as follows

    It follows that the complaint in so far as it concerns compensation for Land A must be rejected for non ‑ exhaustion of domestic remedies pursuant to Article   35   §§ &#

    It follows that this part of the application is manifestly ill-founded within the meaning of Article 35 § 3 of the Convention, and must be rejected in application of Article 35 § 4. IV.

It   follows that the applicants failed to properly exhaust domestic remedies in this respect. 50.

    The facts of the case, as submitted by the parties, may be summarised as follows. Background to the case 5.

    The facts of the case, as submitted by the applicants, may be summarised as follows. 2.

On 5 October 1994 the Court of Magistrates rejected an application for release by Emanuela Brincat.

Their content may be summarised as follows. 29.

This provision reads as follows: “Every natural or legal person is entitled to the peaceful enjoyment of his possessions.

    The facts of the case, as submitted by the parties, may be summarised as follows. Background to the case 5.

The applicants are as follows: Mr Nikolaos Tsomtsos, Mr   Ioannis Velissaropoulos, Mr Asterios Katranis, Mr Vasiliki Katrani, Mrs   Athina Sanopoulou, Mrs Konstantina Kagka, Mrs Ekaterini Stylianidou

On 5 October 1994 the Court of Magistrates rejected an application for release by Emanuela Brincat.