CEDH · PRESS;FORTHCOMINGJUDGMENTS;ENG — 6 novembre 2009

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .s598389F8 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; font-size:11pt } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .sA678F94A { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:right; font-size:11pt } .s2E932ED2 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:11pt } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .s4BAE41EE { font-family:Arial; font-size:11pt } .sA101A847 { font-family:Arial; font-size:11pt; font-weight:bold } .s7ED160F0 { text-decoration:none } .s92A5AB2 { font-family:Arial; font-size:11pt; text-decoration:underline; color:#0069d6 } .s4DDA3AA3 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; font-style:italic } .sC800182F { font-family:Arial; color:#0000ff } .s85B0CDB2 { width:64.87pt; display:inline-block } .s99A63BFE { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:left; font-size:11pt } .sC7EAD8B { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; text-decoration:underline } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic }   830 06.11.2009   Press release issued by the Registrar   FORTHCOMING CHAMBER JUDGMENTS   10 November 2009   The European Court of Human Rights will be notifying in writing 13 Chamber judgments on Tuesday 10   November 2009.   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 ).     Landgren v. Finland (application no. 17889/07) The applicant, Timo Elias Landgren, is a Finnish national who was born in 1968 and lives in Malaga (Spain). The owner of a construction company, he complains about the excessive length of criminal proceedings brought against him in which he was convicted of a building offence and damaging the environment in the city of Espoo (Finland). He relies on Article   6   §   1 (right to a fair trial within a reasonable time) of the European Convention on Human Rights.   Schembri and Others v. Malta (no. 42583/06) The applicants are 11 Maltese nationals; all but one live in Ghaxaq (Malta).   Owners of two plots of land in Ghaxaq, they complain that there was no public purpose for the expropriation of their land and that the compensation they were awarded was not fair or adequate. They rely in particular on Article   1 of Protocol No.   1 (protection of property) to the Convention.   R.R. v. Romania (No. 1) (no. 1188/05) The applicant, R.R., is a Romanian national who was born in 1972 and lives in Bucharest. Following his divorce in 2000, his former wife was awarded custody of their daughter, then aged four. Several sets of judicial proceedings ensued, concerning in particular the applicant’s access rights in respect of his daughter and his former wife’s regular extended visits to the United States with her. Relying on Article 8 (right to respect for private and family life), the applicant complains of the inadequacy of the measures taken by the Romanian authorities to protect his parental rights, in the context of the successive removals to the United States. Relying on Article 6 § 1 (right to a fair hearing within a reasonable time), he further complains that proceedings instituted in the Romanian courts under the Hague Convention on International Child Abduction and actions for damages against the Border Police Department and the Ministry of Justice have been excessively lengthy and/or unfair.   Juez Alibuzu v. Spain (no. 25242/06) The applicant, Juan Juez Albizu, is a Spanish national who was born in 1942 and lives in Biscay (Spain). Relying on Article 6 § 1 (right to a fair hearing) of the Convention, he complains of the lack of reasoning in a court decision in civil proceedings brought against a property development company for failure to honour its contractual obligations concerning the building of a villa.   Arat v. Turkey (no. 10309/03) The applicant, Aladdin Arat, is a Turkish national who was born in 1961 and lives in Diyarbakır (Turkey). Arrested in February 2001 outside his grocery shop, he alleges that he was beaten by the police both during his arrest and subsequent custody. He also complains that the authorities did not effectively investigate that allegation and that the proceedings brought against him for aiding and abetting an illegal organisation were unfair because of the failure to communicate to him the written opinion of the Principal Public Prosecutor at the Court of Cassation. He relies on Articles   3 (prohibition of inhuman or degrading treatment) and   6   §   1 (right to a fair trial).   Bolukoç and Others v. Turkey (no. 35392/04) The applicants, Yunis Bolukoç, Ferhat Kıyak and Ayhan Ateş, are Turkish nationals born in 1962, 1978 and 1980 respectively. They were in Kandıra Prison (Turkey) at the time of the lodging of their application. Arrested on suspicion of membership of an illegal armed organisation in 1998 and 2000, all the applicants complain that they were denied the assistance of a lawyer while in police custody. Mr Bolukoç further complains about the excessive length and unfairness – on account of the presence of a military judge on the bench of the court which tried him – of the criminal proceedings against him. The applicants rely in particular on Article   6   §§   1 and   3   (c) (right to a fair trial within a reasonable time).     Repetitive cases   The following cases raise issues which have already been submitted to the Court.   Čolić and Others v. Bosnia and Herzegovina (nos. 1218/07, 1240/07, 1242/07, 1335/07, 1368/07, 1369/07, 3424/07, 3428/07, 3430/07, 3935/07, 3940/07, 7194/07, 7204/07, 7206/07 and 7211/07) This case concerns the domestic authorities’ failure to enforce final judgments awarding the applicants compensation for war damage . They rely on Article   6   §   1 (right to a fair hearing) and Article   1 of Protocol No.   1 (protection of property).   Demetrescu v. Romania (no. 5046/02) This case concerns the applicant’s inability to obtain effective compensation for property belonging to him that was illegally nationalised. He relies on Article   1 of Protocol No.   1 (protection of property).   Rodica Mihaela Rotaru v. Romania (no. 34325/05) In this case the applicant complains that she was unable to use, and collect rent from, an apartment which had been returned to her. She relies on Article   1 of Protocol No.   1 (protection of property).   Cin and Others v. Turkey (no. 305/03) In this case the applicants complain that the authorities deprived them of their property without paying compensation. They rely on Article   1 of Protocol No.   1 (protection of property).     Length-of-proceedings cases   In the following cases, the applicants complain in particular under Article 6 § 1 (right to a fair hearing within a reasonable time) about the excessive length of (non-criminal) proceedings.   Horsti v. Finland (no. 39509/08)   Fekiač and Fekiačová v. Slovakia (no. 39202/04) Sika v. Slovakia (No. 6) (no. 868/05)     ***   Press contacts Stefano Piedimonte (telephone : 00 33 (0)3 90 21 42 04) Tracey Turner-Tretz (telephone : 00 33 (0)3 88 41 35 30) Kristina Pencheva-Malinowski (telephone : 00 33 (0)3 88 41 35 70) Céline Menu-Lange (telephone : 00 33 (0)3 90 21 58 77) Frédéric Dolt (telephone : 00 33 (0)3 90 21 53 39) Nina Salomon (telephone: 00 33 (0)3 90 21 49 79)   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.