From 15 February to 18 March 2004 the applicant was held in YaCh-91/5 prison in Sarapul.

It also held unanimously that Serbia shall, from its own funds, enforce those final judgments and pay the applicants a total sum of EUR   7,000 in respect of non-pecuniary damage and EUR   300

Consequently, no award is made under this head. 30.

on Human Rights and awarded each applicant 100,000 Slovakian korunas (SKK) for non-pecuniary damage and a global sum of SKK 15,000 for costs and expenses.

Douai, 29 septembre 1997), que le receveur des Impôts du Quesnoy a assigné Mme X..., gérante de la société Art rénovation construction, devant le président du tribunal de grande instance d'Avesnes-sur-Helpe

    On 24 March 1994 the District Office held an administrative hearing.

Costs and expenses are to be paid as a global sum to all the applicants. (The judgments are available only in French.)   (1)     Karatepe and Kırt v.

  A global sum of 188,000 French francs (FRF) is to be paid to the applicant in the case of Acar v. Turkey and a global sum of FF 191,000 in the case of Kemal Güngü v. Turkey .

Accordingly, the Court held unanimously that there had been a violation of Article 2 under its substantive head.

    The applicant was held at the police station from 3 p.m. to 11 p.m.

The first hearing was held on 21 April 1993. B.     Facts after 30 April 1993 6.     The trial court held hearings on 17 May and 28 October 1993.

The Court held unanimously that there had been no violation of Article 5 § 3 (right to liberty and security).

It further held that those findings constituted in themselves sufficient just satisfaction for the non-pecuniary damage sustained by the applicant.

Another hearing was held on 26   June   2001. 24.     At the hearing held on 5   July   2001 the Regional Court gave judgment. 25.

Sum awarded on equitable basis, in respect of all heads of damage taken together. Conclusion : respondent State to pay applicants specified sum (six votes to three). B.

  Ms Moser appealed complaining that neither the Juvenile Court itself nor the other authorities involved in her case had made any effort to help her regulate her residence status or to help her maintain

The Court therefore held unanimously that there had been a violation of Article 6 § 1.

All right, now it is summer and the weather is warm.

held.