CEDH · PRESS;FORTHCOMINGJUDGMENTS;ENG — 31 août 2007

.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 } .s76CF415B { page-break-before:always; clear:both } .s7ED160F0 { text-decoration:none } .s1EDF3BA6 { font-family:Arial; font-size:8pt; font-weight:bold; vertical-align:super; color:#0069d6 } .s3C4DB099 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:left; font-size:10pt } .sC7EAD8B { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; text-decoration:underline } .s2EB42ED2 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:10pt } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .sF6A12959 { width:33%; height:1px; text-align:left } .s653E6C45 { font-family:Arial; font-size:6.67pt; vertical-align:super; color:#0069d6 } EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS   562 31.8.2007   Press release issued by the Registrar   FORTHCOMING CHAMBER JUDGMENTS   6 September 2007   The European Court of Human Rights will be notifying in writing 19 Chamber judgments on Thursday 6 September 2007.   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 ).     Johansson v. Finland (application no. 10163/02) The applicants, Mika Johansson and Jaana Johansson, are Finnish nationals. They complain about the refusal to register the forename “Axl” for their son (Articles 8 and 14 of the European Convention on Human Rights).   Kąkol v. Poland (no. 3994/03) Mucha v. Poland (no. 32849/04) Schmalz v. Poland (no. 19177/03) The applicants are Polish nationals. They complain about the length of their pre-trial detention (Article 5 § 3). Mr Schmalz also alleges that his trial was unfair (Article 6 § 1).   Kijewska v. Poland (no. 73002/01) The applicant, Božena Kijewska, is a Polish national. She complains that excessive court fees prevented her from proceeding with her land registration claim in breach of her right of access to a court (Article 6 § 1).   Kliza v. Poland (no. 8363/04) The applicant, Sebastian Kliza, is a Polish national. He complains about the length of his pre-trial detention (Article 5 § 3), the length of the criminal proceedings brought against him (Article 6 § 1) and interference with his correspondence with the Court (Article 8).   Lewak v. Poland (no. 21890/03) The applicant, Jerzy Lewak, is a Polish national. He alleges ill-treatment by police officers and a prison guard (Article 3) and complains about interference with his correspondence with the Court (Article 8).   Skrzyński v. Poland (no. 38672/02) The applicant, Piotr Skrzyński, is a Polish national. He complains about the designation of his land for expropriation at a future undetermined date (Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 to the Convention). Cabala v. Slovakia (no. 8607/02) The applicant, Peter Cabala, is a Slovakian national. He complains about the lawfulness of his detention, notably the speediness of the procedure for challenging its lawfulness (Article   5) and about the fairness and the length of the criminal proceedings brought against him (Article 6 § 1).   Haris v. Slovakia (no. 14893/02) The applicant, Sándor Haris, is a Hungarian national. He complains about the lawfulness of his detention, notably the speediness of the procedure for challenging its lawfulness, (Article   5) and about the fairness and the length of the criminal proceedings brought against him (Article 6 § 1).   Kucheruk v. Ukraine (no. 2570/04) The applicant, Vladimir Viktorovich Kucheruk, is a Ukrainian national. He complains about ill-treatment by the police and the absence of an investigation and redress in this respect (Articles 3 and 13). He also complains that his detention was unlawful and that there was no periodic review of its lawfulness (Article 5).   Repetitive cases [1]   Non-enforcement cases   In the following cases the applicants complain about the non-enforcement of national judicial decisions in their favour (Article 6 § 1 and, in some cases, Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 and Article 13).   Ungureanu v. Moldova (no. 27568/02) Fateyev v. Ukraine (no. 39265/02) Lozynskyy and Others v. Ukraine (no. 28562/02) Morgunenko v. Ukraine (no. 43382/02) Shamray v. Ukraine (no. 74096/01) Sikorska v. Ukraine (no. 34339/03)   Length-of-proceedings cases   In the following cases, the applicants complain of the excessive length of (non-criminal) proceedings (Article 6 § 1).   Lastovka v. Ukraine (no. 12347/02) Tsykhanovskyy v. Ukraine (no. 3572/03)   ***   Press contacts Emma Hellyer (telephone: 00 33 (0)3 90 21 42 15) Stéphanie Klein (telephone: 00 33 (0)3 88 41 21 54) Tracey Turner-Tretz (telephone: 00 33 (0)3 88 41 35 30) Paramy Chanthalangsy (telephone: 00 33 (0)3 90 21 54 91)   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. [1]   Cases which raise issues which have been dealt with by the Court in numerous previous judgments.