CEDH · PRESS;FORTHCOMINGJUDGMENTS;ENG — 6 mai 2010

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .sA678F94A { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:right; font-size:11pt } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .s598389F8 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; 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 } .sADADF4A7 { font-family:Arial; text-decoration:underline } .s4DDA3AA3 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; font-style:italic } .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 } 368 06.05.2010   Press release issued by the Registrar   FORTHCOMING CHAMBER JUDGMENTS   11 and 12 May 2010   The European Court of Human Rights will be notifying in writing two Chamber judgments on Tuesday 11   May 2010 and nine on Wednesday 12 May 2010.   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 11 May 2010   Fleury v. France (application no. 29784/06) The applicant, Michel Fleury, is a French national who was born in 1944 and lives in Clohars-Carnoët (Finistère, France). In 2006, during his term of office as town councillor, he was convicted in a final judgment for defamation against the Mayor of his municipality, following the distribution of a leaflet accusing the Mayor of a number of offences. Relying mainly on Article 10 (freedom of expression) of the European Convention on Human Rights, Mr Fleury complains about his conviction.   Versini v. France (no. 11898/05) The applicant, Antoine Versini, is a French national who was born in 1934 and lives in La Colle-sur-Loup (France). In 1995 the company running a prestigious hotel-restaurant of which he was the manager faced a tax reassessment that it successfully challenged before the administrative courts. In parallel, criminal proceedings for tax fraud were brought against him as manager and he was convicted in a final judgment of 2004. Relying on Article   6   §   1 (right to a fair trial), Mr Versini alleges that his trial was unfair, the principle of the equality of arms having been breached.     Wednesday 12 May 2010   Kammerer v. Austria (no. 32435/06) The applicant, Hermann Kammerer, is an Austrian national who was born in 1955 and lives in Axams (Austria). Relying on Article   6   §   1 (right to a fair trial), he complains that a hearing before the Independent Administrative Panel – concerning proceedings brought against him for not having had the MOT test done on his car – was held in his absence.   Kalogranis and Kalograni v. Greece (no. 17229/08) The applicants are a brother and sister, Dimitrios Kalogranis and Fani Kalograni. Greek nationals, they were born respectively in 1979 and 1980 and live in Athens. Relying in particular on Article   6   §   1 (right to a fair hearing), they complain about the authorities’ refusal to comply with a 1995 judgment of the Supreme Administrative Court concerning a plot of land that should have been returned to their grandfather, who died in 2001, and of whom they are the heirs.   Khodzhayev v. Russia (no. 52466/08) The applicant, Zikrullokhon Khodzhayev, is a Tajikistani national who was born in 1977 and lives in Khunzhand (Tajikistan). He is currently detained in Moscow pending extradition. The case concerns his complaint that, if extradited to Tajikistan, he would be at risk of being subjected to an unfair trial and to ill-treatment due to his alleged involvement in Hizb   ut ‑ Tahrir, a banned Islamic organisation. He relies on Article   3 (prohibition of inhuman or degrading treatment) and Article   6   §   1 (right to a fair trial). He also makes various complaints under Article   5   §§   1 and   4 (right to liberty and security) about the unlawfulness of his detention pending extradition. Lastly, he claims that he has no effective remedies for his complaints under Articles 3 and 5, in breach of Article   13 (right to an effective remedy).   Kositsyn v. Russia (no. 69535/01) The applicant, Yevgeniy Kositsyn, is a Russian national who was born in 1962 and is currently serving a 14-year prison sentence in Kaliningrad (Russia) for murder. Relying on Article   3 (prohibition of inhuman or degrading treatment), he complains about the conditions of his detention on remand during the criminal proceedings against him.   Shakhabova v. Russia (no. 39685/06) Suleymanova v. Russia (no. 9191/06) Both cases concern the applicants’ allegations that their close relatives were killed by Russian servicemen in Chechnya. In the case of Shakhabova the applicant alleges that her son was detained in November 2002 during an unacknowledged security operation at his aunt’s house in Urus-Martan; she has had no news of her son since. In the case of Suleymanova the applicant alleges that Russian servicemen opened fire on – then launched a grenade at – the lorry in which her son, his wife, child and brother-in-law were travelling in to visit a sick relative. Both applicants further complain that the domestic authorities failed to carry out an effective investigation into their allegations. They rely in particular on Articles 2 (right to life) and 13 (right to an effective remedy). The applicant in the case of Shakhabova , also relies on Articles   3 (prohibition of inhuman or degrading treatment) and   5 (right to liberty and security).     Repetitive cases   The following cases raise issues which have already been submitted to the Court.   Gulyayev v. Russia (no. 20023/07) This case concerns the applicant’s complaint that a final judgment in his favour was quashed by way of supervisory review. He relies on Article   6   §   1 (right to a fair hearing).   Privalikhin v. Russia (no. 38029/05) Yeldashev v. Russia (no. 5730/03) These cases concern the applicants’ complaints that the domestic authorities failed to enforce final judgments in their favour in good time. They rely on Article   6   §   1 (right to a fair hearing) and Article   1 of Protocol No.   1 (protection of property).   ***   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.