Les parties ayant été régulièrement averties du jour de l'audience ; Après avoir entendu au cours de l'audience publique : - le rapport de Mme Bénédicte Lordonné, première conseillère ; - les conclusions

européenne, notamment dans son arrêt du 17 septembre 2002, Baumbast, R et Secretary of State for the Home Department (C-413-99) et dans ses arrêts de grande chambre du 23 février 2010, Maria Teixeira c/ London

B A représenté par Me Loison, demande au tribunal : 1°) d'annuler l'arrêté du 8 octobre 2024 par lequel le préfet de police de Paris a rejeté sa demande de titre de séjour, l'a obligé à quitter le territoire

The second applicant is a British citizen born in 1963 and also resident in London. Both applicants are members of the an unincorporated association "Negotiate Now", which is the third applicant.

    The applicant has resided in London since early 2005 at least. N.S. has resided with him since March 2006. 8 .

He was released on 25 October 1971 and now lives in Poplar, East London.

Chahal of Bindmans LLP, a lawyer practising in London. The applicant in the second case, Mr Mahamoud Mohamed Ahmed, is a British national who was born in 1940 and lives in London.

He was represented before the Court by Royds Rdw, solicitors in London. The United Kingdom Government (“the Government”) were represented by their Agent, Mr C.

He was represented before the Court by Royds Rdw, solicitors in London. The United Kingdom Government (“the Government”) were represented by their Agent, Mr C.

He was represented before the Court by Royds Rdw, solicitors in London. The United Kingdom Government (“the Government”) were represented by their Agent, Mr C.

He was represented before the Court by Royds Rdw, solicitors in London. The United Kingdom Government (“the Government”) were represented by their Agent, Mr C.

He was represented before the Court by Royds Rdw, solicitors in London. The United Kingdom Government (“the Government”) were represented by their Agent, Mr C.

He was represented before the Court by Royds Solicitors, London. The United Kingdom Government (“the Government”) were represented by their Agent, Mr C.

Walton of the Foreign and Commonwealth Office, London. The facts of the case, as submitted by the parties, may be summarised as follows.

Walton, of the Foreign and Commonwealth Office, London. The facts of the case, as submitted by the parties, may be summarised as follows.

He was represented before the Court by Royds Rdw, solicitors in London. The United Kingdom Government (“the Government”) were represented by their Agent, Mr C.

He was represented before the Court by Royds Rdw, solicitors in London. The United Kingdom Government (“the Government”) were represented by their Agent, Mr C.

He was represented before the Court by Royds Rdw, solicitors in London. The United Kingdom Government (“the Government”) were represented by their Agent, Mr C.

He was represented before the Court by Mr   John Clinch, a lawyer practising in London. The United Kingdom Government (“the Government”) were represented by their Agent, Mr   C.

He was represented before the Court by Rowley Ashworth Solicitors, London. The United Kingdom Government (“the Government”) were represented by their Agent, Mr C.