On 2 July 1996 the applicant obtained a judgment in his favour by which a private company was obliged to reimburse the applicant's share in the company's capital stock.

However, the compensations for a delay in the payment of salary awarded by all four judgments in the amounts of UAH   639.38 [5] in favour of the first and UAH   673.94 [6] in favour of the second

    In 2002 the applicant instituted proceedings in the Zaliznodorozhnyi Court against the Bailiffs’ Service for failure to enforce the judgment in his favour.

    Domestic judgment in favour of the applicant and its enforcement 2.     The facts of the case may be summarised as follows. 3.

    Has the judgment of 20   February 2019 issued by the Kirovskiy District Court of Ufa in the applicant’s favour been enforced?

    The applicant complained about the State authorities’ failure to enforce the judgment of the Novogrodivka City Court given in his favour.

The colleagues who testified in favour of the applicant were collectively called “defenders of the children’s killer” ( vaikų žudiko užtarėjai ) who were “trying to get him off” ( bando išsukti ).

    Complaints concerning lengthy non-enforcement of the judgments in the applicants' favour Following the Yuriy Nikolayevich Ivanov v.

    In December 2004 the applicant requested the Moskovskyy District Court to issue a writ of execution in his favour. 10.

    In the case at hand, the courts found in favour of the applicants in an action for the recovery of the sums retained from their salaries as health insurance contributions.

RG 21/04516 - N° Portalis DBVM-V-B7F-LC4J C8 Minute : Copie exécutoire délivrée le : la SELARL CABINET LAURENT FAVET

in favour of the applicant in respect of part of the shop’s first floor.

On 12 May 1999 the Town Court examined the claim and found in the applicant's favour. The court ruled that the authority had erred in setting the amount of the applicant's monthly compensation.

It, therefore, considers that the Government shall secure, by appropriate means, the enforcement of the judgments in the applicants’ favour. FOR THESE REASONS, THE COURT UNANIMOUSLY 1.

    Both applicants complain of the non-enforcement of the judgments given in their favour.

Prior to the transfer in favour of the applicant company the property was owned by G. Limited which until recently was also a shareholder of the applicant company. On 1 January 1973 G.

defendants (including a former President of Romania and a former Head of the Romanian Intelligence Service) from the investigation involving military personnel, and to relinquish its jurisdiction in favour

    The applicant alleged, in particular, that the judgment issued in his favour had not been enforced within a reasonable time and that the domestic authorities had failed to protect his home

On 11 March 2002, the Plenary Supreme Court of Justice issued a judgment deciding the dispute between ASITO and the pension beneficiaries in favour of the former.