CEDH · PRESS;FORTHCOMINGJUDGMENTS;ENG — 9 juin 2006

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .sFE10DC93 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .s40F41F73 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:right } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .sADADF4A7 { font-family:Arial; text-decoration:underline } .s4DDA3AA3 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; font-style:italic } .s9FF10068 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt } .sA99CEC23 { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:5pt } .s9AE6264A { margin-top:5pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .s32B93E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:5pt } .s9B49264A { margin-top:5pt; margin-bottom:5pt } .sCB9E0544 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:left } .sC7EAD8B { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; text-decoration:underline } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS   338 9.6.2006   Press release issued by the Registrar   FORTHCOMING CHAMBER JUDGMENTS   13 and 15 June 2006   The European Court of Human Rights will be notifying in writing 23 Chamber judgments on Tuesday 13 June 2006 and 20 on Thursday 15 June 2006.   Press releases and texts of the judgments will be available at 11 a.m. (local time) on the Court’s Internet site ( http://www.echr.coe.int ).   Tuesday 13 June 2006   Lehtonen v. Finland (application no. 11704/03) The applicant, Ari Lehtonen, is a Finnish national who was born in 1957 and lives in Muurla (Finland).   He complains in particular under Articles 6 § 1 (right to a fair trial within a reasonable time) and Article 13 (right to an effective remedy) of the European Convention on Human Rights.   Bogulak v. Poland (no. 33866/96) The applicant, Jóseph Bogulak, is a Polish national who was born in 1946 and lives in Wrocław (Poland).   He relies on Article 5 § 3 (right to be brought promptly before a judge) and Article 5 §   4 (right to have lawfulness of detention decided speedily by a court) of the Convention.   Múčková v. Slovakia (no. 21302/02) The applicant, Helena Múčková, is a Slovakian national who was born in 1939 and lives in Bratislava.   She relies on Article 6 § 1 (right to a fair hearing) and Article 13 (right to an effective remedy).   Karakaş v. Turkey (no. 76991/01) The applicant, Hüseyin Karakaş, is a Turkish national who was born in 1968 and lives in Bartın (Turkey).   He relies on Articles 5 § 3 (right to liberty and security) and 6   §   1 (right to a fair hearing within a reasonable time).         Repetitive cases   Istrate v. Moldova (no. 53773/00) The applicant, Andrei Istrate, is a Moldovan national who was born in 1937 and lives in Chişinǎu. He relies on Article 6 § 1 (right to a fair hearing within a reasonable time) and Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 (protection of property).   Başboğa v. Turkey (no. 64277/01) Kutal and Uğraş v. Turkey (no. 61648/00) The applicants are Turkish nationals. Mehmet Ata Başboğa was born in 1966 and was detained in Aydın Prison when he lodged his application before the European Court of Human Rights. Firet Kutal and Volkan Uğraş were born in 1982 and were detained respectively in Muş Prison and Buca Prison (Turkey) when they lodged their applications. They rely in particular on Article 6 (right to a fair hearing).   Çağlar and Others v. Turkey (no. 57647/00) Dolgun v. Turkey (no. 67255/01) Ergün v. Turkey (no. 45807/99) Fatma Bakır v. Turkey (no. 76603/01) Kara Midilli v. Turkey (no. 76498/01) Kavraroğlu and Others v. Turkey (no. 76698/01) Mustafa Yıldırım v. Turkey (no. 76719/01) Okur v. Turkey (no. 76567/01) Titiz and Others v. Turkey (no. 67144/01) Topakogöz v. Turkey (no. 76481/01) Tulumbacı and Others v. Turkey (no. 76571/01) Yusuf Sarı v. Turkey (no. 76797/01) The applicants rely on Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 (protection of property). Except in the case Ergün c. Turquie , they also rely on Article 6   § 1 (right to a fair hearing within a reasonable time).   Length-of-proceedings cases   In the following cases the applicants complain of the excessive length of civil proceedings.   Gažíková v. Slovakia (no. 66083/01) Kvasnová v. Slovakia (no. 67039/01) Magura v. Slovakia (no. 44068/02) Sika v. Slovakia (no. 2132/02)     Thursday 15 June 2006   Zlínsat, spol. s r.o. v. Bulgaria (no. 57785/00) The applicant, Zlínsat, spol. s r.o., is a limited liability company incorporated under Czech law and based in Fryšták (Czech Republic).   The applicant company complains under Article 6 § 1 (right to a fair hearing within a reasonable time), Article 13 (right to an effective remedy) and Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 (protection of property).   Lykourezos v. Greece (no. 33554/03) Alexandros-Léon Lykourezos is a 72-year-old Greek national who lives in Athens. The applicant, who is a lawyer, lost his seat in parliament following a change in eth constitution which did not allow members of parliament to carry out other professional activities.   He relies on Article 3 of Protocol No. 1 (right to free elections) and Article 8 (right to respect for private life).   Jurjevs v. Latvia (no. 70923/01)   The applicant, Jurijs Jurjevs, is a Latvian national who was born in 1956 and lives in Riga.   He relies on Article 5 (right to liberty and security).   Kornakovs v. Latvia (no. 61005/00) Moisejevs v. Latvia (no. 64846/01) The applicants, Eduards Kornakovs and Oļegs Moisejevs, are former nationals of the ex-Union of Soviet Socialist Republics and "permanently resident non-citizens" of Latvia, born in 1970 and 1959 respectively. Mr Kornakovs is domiciled in Riga and Mr Moisejevs is currently detained in Mārupe (Latvia). They were both arrested in 1996 in connection with an investigation into an armed robbery. They rely on Articles 5 (right to liberty and security) 6   §   1 (right to a fair hearing within a reasonable time), 8 (right to respect for private and family life), 34 (right of individual petition).   Shevanova v. Latvia (no. 58822/00) The applicant, Nina Shevanova, is a Russian national who was born in 1948 and lives in Riga. The case concerns a decision by the authorities to deport the applicant from Latvia, where she had lived for 35 years.   She relies on Article 8 (right to respect for private and family life).   Abǎluţǎ v. Romania (no. 77195/01) Pântea v. Romania (no. 5050/02) The applicants, Constantin Abǎluţǎ and Elisabeta Pântea, are Romanian nationals who were born in 1938 and 1962, respectively. Mr Abǎluţǎ lives in Bucharest and Ms Pântea in Bârlad (Roumania).   They rely on Article 6 § 1 (right to a fair hearing). Mr Abǎluţǎ also relies on Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 (protection of property).   Cârstea and Grecu v. Romania (no. 56326/00)   The applicants, Rodica Cârstea and Veronica Grecu, are Romanian nationals who were born in 1956 and 1959, respectively and live in Bucharest.   They rely on Article 6 § 1 (right to a fair hearing).   Lacarcel Mendez v. Spain (no. 41745/02) The applicant, Isabel Lacárcel Menédez, is a Spanish national who was born in 1931 and lives in Murcia (Spain).   She relies on Article 6 § 1 (right to a fair hearing within a reasonable time) Article 13 (right to an effective remedy) and Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 (protection of property).   Repetitive cases   Mario Federici v. Italy (No. 2) (no.s 67917/01 and 68859/01) The applicant, Mario Federici, is an Italian national who was born in 1926 and lives in Rome.   He complains that he was unable to recover possession of his apartments over an extended period, owing to a lack of police assistance. He also complains of the length of the eviction proceedings. He relies on Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 (protection of property) and Article 6 § 1 (right to a fair hearing within a reasonable time).   Kazmina v. Russia (no. 72374/01) Kuksa v. Russia (no. 35259/04) The applicants are both Russian nationals living in Russia, Tatyana Mikhaylovna Kazmina, who was born in 1936 and lives in Novovoronezh, and Sergey Vladimirovich Kuksa, who was born in 1951 and lives in Yakutsk.   They rely on Article 6 § 1 (right to a fair hearing within a reasonable time) and Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 (protection of property) about the non-enforcement of the judgments given in their favour.   Mikhaylova and Others v. Ukraine (no. 16475/02) Nedbayev v. Ukraine (no. 18485/04) The applicants are 17 Ukrainian nationals who all rely, in particular, on Article 6 § 1 (right to a fair hearing).   Length-of-proceedings cases   In the following cases the applicants complain of the excessive length of civil proceedings. The applicants in all the cases (except Škare v. Croatia ) further rely on Article 13 (right to an effective remedy) in respect of their complaints about the excessive length of proceedings.   Škare v. Croatia (no. 17267/03) Kostovska v. the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia (no. 44353/02) Bakiyevets v. Russia (no. 22892/03) Chevkin v. Russia (no. 4171/03) Digitel d.o.o. v. Slovenia (no. 70660/01) ***   Press Contacts   Emma Hellyer (telephone: 00 33 (0)3 90 21 42 15) Stéphanie Klein (telephone: 00 33 (0)3 88 41 21 54) Beverley Jacobs (telephone: 00 33 (0)3 90 21 54 21)   The European Court of Human Rights was set up in Strasbourg by the Council of Europe Member States in 1959 to deal with alleged violations of the 1950 European Convention on Human Rights.