C D, représenté par Me Sebastian Van Teslaar et Me Theo Laucoin, agissant en qualité d'ayant droit de son fils B F, demande au juge des référés, saisi sur le fondement de l'article R.532-1 du code de

In support of their claims that they had lived in Lachin for most of their lives until their forced displacement and that they had houses and land there, the applicants submitted various documents to the

    The applicants have stated that they are Azerbaijani Kurds who lived in the district of Lachin, where their ancestors had lived for hundreds of years.

They also complain that there is no prospect for them in the foreseeable future to be able to use, sell, bequeath, mortgage or develop their property as the Armenian Government continues to refuse to allow

Their request was rejected with reference to the Dublin Convention and the German authorities returned them to Italy, where they had obtained a visa.

    The applicants and the property allegedly owned by them in the district of Lachin 32.

They stated that, while they greatly miss their homeland in the district of Lachin, they cannot return due to the ongoing conflict and the lack of security. 13 .

They also complain that there is no prospect for them in the foreseeable future to be able to use, sell, bequeath, mortgage or develop their property as the Armenian Government continues to refuse to allow

The applicants allege that they were forced by the escalating military conflict to flee to Baku (Azerbaijan) in 1992 and have been unable to return as Lachin is under the effective control of Armenia.

The applicants allege that they were forced by the escalating military conflict to flee to Baku (Azerbaijan) in 1992 and have been unable to return as Lachin is under the effective control of Armenia.

Their four children grew up in the house and he and his wife continued to live there until they had to flee in June 1992.

The loss of salaries and other income was not related to the lack of access to the applicants’ property and homes but rather to their displacement from Lachin in 1992.

The loss of salaries and other income was not related to the lack of access to the applicants’ property and homes but rather to their displacement from Lachin in 1992.

    On different dates the applicants lodged civil actions with the Yasamal District Court asking the court to order the eviction of these families from their flats. A.

of information on the captives, the impossibility of communicating with them and the fact that they were detained in a hostile environment where their life and well-being were under threat. 3.

The court found that the criminal charges against the applicant and the co-defendants had required their obligatory legal representation at the initial stage of the proceedings, whereas they had not been

In the Court’s view, the difficult circumstances of the case and the overriding interests of the child had prevented the authorities from doing any more than they had.

They all live in Malta.   The case concerns an article published in the “ In-Nazzjon Taghna ” by the applicants referring to a disagreement about a road project in Fgura.

If these documents provide new evidence, the judge shall ask the other party to examine them and submit his observations thereon to him at the hearing."

The applicants complain under Article 11 of the Convention that by failing to register the non-governmental organisations founded by them the domestic authorities breached their right to freedom of association