He requested it to order his release from custody.

with his application for release. 4.

During the subsequent civil proceedings his and his wife’s written statements, including evidence requests, had been ignored.

Often he had a visible hangover, which showed in his not being neatly dressed, in his reddish and swollen face, in his shaking hands and in his breath which smelled freshly of alcohol.'

The Federal Court of Justice had held that the applicant had not lost his title by usucapio .

K... relativement aux clés en ajoutant 'dernière mise en garde avant sanction' ; le compte rendu fait aussi apparaître que M.

The applicant was due to be interviewed on 28 March 1995 and went missing from his unit. On 20 April 1995 he was arrested by the civilian police and returned to his unit.

Since his personality development was under threat, there was a chance of further distortion of his personality. The suspect required treatment for that.

If they do so, that will render any incriminating answers which he gives inadmissible in evidence at his subsequent trial ( Lord Advocate's Reference (No.1 of 1983) 1984 JC 52).

he does not dispute the legality of his detention either before or after these dates.

  He lives with his partner and their three year-old child.

AU NOM DU PEUPLE FRANCAIS LA COUR DE CASSATION, PREMIERE CHAMBRE CIVILE, a rendu l'arrêt suivant : Sur le pourvoi formé par M.

The national legislation in force at the time of his appointment clearly specified his term of office and enumerated exhaustively the specific grounds on which it could be terminated.

violating his right to be presumed innocent.

that his attendance could not be said to be voluntary.

The applicant states that he had difficulty in obtaining the drugs and first asked his agent and then a friend. He finally located the drugs through someone that his friend knew.

He caught 300 kg of cod of which he intended to give 100 kg to his daughter, living at Bodø, and 200 kg to his son, living in Trondheim.

  In the course of these investigations the applicant stated on his own initiative that in March 1993 he had performed euthanasia on, and at the request of, one of his patients.

daughter until the appeal of his daughter’s mother had been heard.

The Court of Appeal upheld the applicant’s conviction in his absence but reduced his sentence to eleven years’ imprisonment.