THE LAW The applicant complained of the non-enforcement of domestic decision given in his favour. He relied on Article   6 § 1 and Article 1 of Protocol   No.

    The applicant complained under Articles 6 and 13 of, and Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 to, the Convention of the non-enforcement of the final judgment adopted in his favour against the Republika

    The applicant complained about the non-enforcement of a final decision in her favour. 11.

On 1 February 2005, the Chamber to which the case had been allocated, relinquished jurisdiction in favour of the Grand Chamber, under Article 30 [1] of the Convention.

On 29   March 2007 the Chamber to which the case had been allocated relinquished jurisdiction in favour of the Grand Chamber, under Article   30 [1] of the Convention.

, the Court considers that for the reasons stated below, the respondent Government cannot be held liable for the non-enforcement or the delayed enforcement of the judgments given in the applicants’ favour

COMPLAINTS The applicant company complains that the authorities’ prolonged failure to comply with the binding and enforceable judgment of 7 July 2008 in its favour violated its right to a court under Article

    The applicants complained about the lengthy non-enforcement of the decisions given in their favour and about the lack of effective domestic remedies in respect of those complaints.

The court notes that the judgments [in favour of the appellants] have not been enforced due to the lack of funds on the debtor’s bank account. ... 45.

interprétées par Georges SCHMITT (Pastourelle, Aurore, A Mezzu Mare, Triste est le ciel) reproduites sur un compact disque sous le titre : "Romantic - Favourites - 14 Midnight Melodies " référence FAVO

    Civil proceedings initiated by the applicant and enforcement of the judgment in his favour 33.

GOVERNMENT'S PRELIMINARY OBJECTION (failure to exhaust domestic remedies) Possibility of application to "join" appeal to Audiencia Provincial not open to applicant as first-instance court had found in his favour

Likewise, an appeal to the Enforcement Office would not have enabled the applicant company to have the judgment in its favour executed.

The applicant complained about non-enforcement of a judgment in his favour. Notice of the application was given to the Government, who submitted a unilateral declaration on 28 May 2010.

Having regard to its size, was the award in favour of the claimant “necessary in a democratic society” (see Tolstoy Miloslavsky v. the United Kingdom , 13 July 1995, § 55, Series A no. 316 ‑ B)?

V LIKVIDÁCII against Slovakia lodged on 28 July 2017 SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE The application concerns the non-enforcement of an international arbitration award, issued in the applicant company’s favour

The applicant complained about non-enforcement of a judgment against a State authority in his favour. On 11 February 2010 the case was communicated for information to the respondent Government.

lump sum including pecuniary damage for loss of   investment and   profits as the proceedings   had exceeded the reasonable time requirement and   the decision in the applicant's favour

The appellate court ruled in the applicant’s favour, arguing that the hospital was vicariously liable and relying on the relevant provisions of the Civil Code on vicarious liability.