Proceedings concerning visitation rights On an unspecified date the first applicant brought an action on her behalf and on behalf of the other applicants asking the court to grant them visitation

    Nevertheless, the applicant succeeded in having the Prosecutor General exercise his discretionary power to challenge the judgment on the applicants’ behalf in the Supreme Court by way of

offered to make the payments not as compensation for expropriation, but on the basis of contracts of sale to be entered into by the applicants and an individual, Z.I., who was apparently acting on behalf

Nevertheless, the company had not ceased to exist as a legal person and the decision-making bodies of a company in liquidation continue to exist and may act on its behalf in certain limited circumstances

On 28 December 2011 and 6 February 2012 respectively Ms Hurkovska appealed on behalf of the December and January Groups of applicants.

s behalf for settlement on the basis of her marriage on 11 December 1992 to the first applicant, who was claimed to be a British citizen.   9.

The applicants have introduced their application on behalf of their deceased husbands and on their own and their children’s behalf.

    On 29 June 1992 the military prosecutor informed the applicant that the authorities of Poland, Belarus and Ukraine had also been involved in the investigation of his son's whereabouts.

On 27 April 1995 the Samandağ Municipality, acting on behalf of the Treasury, requested the Samandağ Court of First Instance in Civil Matters to determine whether the applicants' plot of land was located

    Subsequently, on the applicant’s behalf, his trade union, the Hotel and Restaurant Workers’ Union, instituted proceedings against Air Inn before the Labour Court claiming that the dismissal

        On behalf of the Government            On behalf of the applicant         (signed)

        The applicant further complains that the Ministry of Justice dismissed his request to lodge an extraordinary appeal on his behalf.

On 28   October 2013 the second applicant lodged a request to pursue the application before the Court on the first applicant’s behalf.

April, 1964 by a default judgment, since on that date no lawyer appeared on behalf of the Applicant, his second lawyer on whom the summons for this hearing had been served having withdrawn from the case

observations were received, they were sent to the applicant’s legal representative on 13 October 2016 in order for him to submit the applicant’s observations in reply and just satisfaction claims on his behalf

    On 22 December 2011 one of the applicants’ lawyers lodged a petition with the Ninth Division of the Istanbul Assize Court on behalf of the second applicant and two other persons and requested

He also complains under Article 6 §§ 1 and 3(d) of the Convention that the criminal proceedings against him were unfair as he was not able to obtain the attendance of witnesses on his behalf under the

force at the material time, found the applicant guilty of the following offences and sentenced him as follows: (i)     six years and three months’ imprisonment for committing an offence on behalf

Court had no concrete and relevant indications that the confidence between the applicant and his defence counsel was so seriously disturbed that defence counsel was not in a position duly to act on behalf