margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic }   Communicated on 20 September 2017   FIFTH SECTION Application no 25601/12 Lali KHIZANISHVILI and Giorgi KANDELAKI

Malta , no. 43675/16, §§ 51-53, 28 May 2019, and Khizanishvili and Kandelaki v. Georgia , no. 25601/12, §§ 47-50, 17   December 2019)?    

to buildings managed by the Chancellery of the Sejm and access and entry to the grounds under the management of the Chancellery of the Sejm ( w sprawie wstępu do budynków pozostających w zarządzie Kancelarii

On 12 June 2018 the Director of the Sejm’s Chancellery ( Szef Kancelarii Sejmu ), acting on behalf of the Sejm’s Speaker, refused this application, finding that the applicant was not a journalist under

It was not therefore unreasonable for the applicant to have expected full compensation for the resulting damage (compare Khizanishvili and Kandelaki, cited above, § 54). 25.

jurisdiction to assess whether the compensation was reasonably related to the value of the property taken, within the meaning of Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 to the Convention (see Khizanishvili and Kandelaki

Accordingly, it was not unreasonable for the applicant to have expected full compensation for the resulting damage (compare Khizanishvili and Kandelaki v.

closely connected to the merits of the applicant’s complaint under Article   1 of Protocol No. 1 to the Convention that it   should be joined to   the merits (compare Khizanishvili and Kandelaki

closely connected to the merits of the applicant’s complaint under Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 to the Convention that it should be joined to the merits (see, for a similar approach, Khizanishvili and Kandelaki

  Ekaterini KANDERAKI-THEODOSIOU 13.   Matthaios KARAGIANNIS 14.   Georgios KARYDAS 15.   Vassilios KORDONOURIS 16.   Michail KONTOS 17.   Dimitrios PANAGIOTIDIS 18.

objection concerning the applicants’ victim status is so closely connected to the merits of their property complaint that it   should be joined to   the merits (compare Khizanishvili and Kandelaki

  Ekaterini KANDERAKI-THEODOSIOU 13.   Matthaios KARAGIANNIS 14.   Georgios KARYDAS 15.   Vassilios KORDONOURIS 16.   Michail KONTOS 17.   Dimitrios PANAGIOTIDIS 18.

  France [GC], n o   34044/02, §   78, CEDH   2010, et Khizanishvili et Kandelaki c.   Géorgie , n o   25601/12, §   48, 17   décembre   2019). 42.

; display:inline-block } .s9E304268 { width:190.42pt; display:inline-block } .sA2E62387 { width:204.97pt; display:inline-block }       FIFTH SECTION   CASE OF KHIZANISHVILI AND KANDELAKI

détriment de l’accusé   ; –     Une interdiction temporaire d’exercer la profession de notaire avait pour corollaire l’interdiction de diriger une étude notariale ( zakaz prowadzenia kancelarii

to the possibility available to the applicants to request the reopening of the proceedings in accordance with Article 423 §   1 (g) of the Code of Civil Procedure (see   Khizanishvili and Kandelaki

the buildings managed by the Chancellery of the Sejm and access and entry to the grounds under the management of the Chancellery of the Sejm ( w sprawie wstępu do budynków pozostających w zarządzie Kancelarii

    When hearing the appeal, the applicant gave a decision ordering the Head of the Chancellery of the Sejm ( Szef Kancelarii Sejmu ) to produce copies of lists of citizens and judges supporting

;         P.K. 1946 grecque Glyka Nera                      Irakli KANDELAKI