By letter dated 5 July 2010, sent by registered post, the applicant was notified that the period allowed for submission of his observations   had expired on 20 April 2010 and that no extension of

former Article 25 of the Convention by Mr Bédirhan Demirtepe, a Turkish national, and that the Commission declared admissible the complaint that the opening, by the prison authorities, of several letters sent

Separately, the same letter was sent to the other address indicated in the documents submitted by the applicant.

By a letter of 26 February 2009 the Government’s observations were sent to the applicant, who was requested to submit any observations in reply by 9   April 2009, together with any claims for just

By letter dated 6 January 2011, sent by registered post, the applicant was notified that the Court had received no reply to the letter of 8 October 2010 whereby he had been invited to submit his observations

On 17 September 2020 the Registry sent a letter to the applicant requesting to submit comments on the Government’s observations of 8   September 2020. No reply was received to this letter.

    By letter dated 13 December 2017, sent by registered post, the applicant company was invited to inform the Court about any developments of the proceedings at the domestic level.

By a letter dated 16 February 2009 the Government’s observations were sent to the applicant, who was requested to submit any observations in reply together with any claims for just satisfaction by 30 March

By letter dated 6 October 2023, sent by registered post, the applicant was notified that the period allowed for submission of his observations   had expired on 8 March 2023 and that no extension of

By letter dated 29 October 2007, sent by registered post, the applicant was notified that the period allowed for submission of the his observations had expired on 4 September 2007 and that no extension

By letter dated 15 October 2008, sent by registered post, the applicant was notified that the period allowed for submission of the his observations had expired on 27 June 2008 and that no extension of

A copy of the Government’s letter was sent to the applicant’s address for any comment. No reply was received.

On 10 January 2019 the Registry sent a letter to the applicant’s representative inviting him to inform the Court as to whether the applicant had had, or intended to have, recourse to the remedy in question

By a letter of 26 February 2009 the Government’s observations were sent to the applicant, who was requested to submit any observations in reply by 9   April 2009, together with any claims for just

By letter dated 16 November 2010, sent by registered post, the applicant was notified that the extended period allowed for submission of his observations had expired on 30 July 2010 and that no extension

On 10 January 2019 the Registry sent a letter to the applicant’s representative inviting him to inform the Court about the progress, if any, or the outcome of the relevant proceedings.

The applicant’s representative did not consult the documents sent by the Court via its Electronic Communication Service (eComms) and did not reply to phone calls.

On 19 November 2019 the Registry sent a letter to the applicant requesting observations on the admissibility and merits of the application and of his claims for just satisfaction.

By letter dated 17 September 2019, sent by registered post, the applicant was notified that the period allowed for submission of his observations   had expired on 14 March 2019 and that no extension

THE LAW On 16 January 2008 the Government’s observations were sent to the applicant, who was requested to submit any observations together with any claims for just satisfaction in reply by 19 March 2008