On each occasion he was released only because he paid the authorities off. 10.

However, it later had to annul its own decision because under Croatian law it was not empowered to rule against a defendant who failed to appear in paternity proceedings.

It is therefore not open to the Court to set aside the application of the six-month rule solely because a Government has not made a preliminary objection based on it...”

In an earlier application to the European Commission of Human Rights (no. 23473/94), the Commission had already found a violation of Article 6 because the applicant had not had its case examined within

Did Russian legislation regulate in detail the case of persons whose telephone conversations were intercepted accidentally because they participated in a conversation with a person whose telephone was

Relying on Articles 1 and 6 § 1 of the Convention, the applicant complains that the investigation into her allegations of rape and the subsequent trial had been ineffective and unfair because the authorities

He was taken to a police station in a police car during which he was insulted because of his Roma origin and physically assaulted by the officers.

He was then sentenced to a fine because the courts considered that the situation fell within the scope of solo demonstrations with recourse to “quickly (de)assembled object(s) obstructing passers-by or

According to the amendment, if the auction took place because the debtor (the original owner) had had a mortgage in foreign currency which he could not honour, then such eviction could not take place in

The domestic courts eventually dismissed her civil action only because she had not requested the correction in her individual capacity.

favour and awarded them compensation, the Supreme Court, following the local authorities’ appeal on points of law, reversed the lower courts’ judgments and dismissed the applicants’ civil action only because

The application raises issues concerning the principle of equality of arms because the submission (response to the applicant’s appeal) of the State Attorney’s Office to the Appeals Court in Novi Sad had

Relying on Article 8 of the Convention the applicant complained about a breach of his rights to honour and private life because the domestic courts failed to protect his aforementioned rights, assessed

favour and awarded her compensation, the Supreme Court, following the public companies’ appeal on points of law, reversed the lower courts’ judgments and dismissed the applicant’s civil action only because

The applicant complains that the proceedings were not fair because the Supreme Court of Justice acted as a first instance court but without conducting a proper hearing.

Because the actual fine was below 400 euros, the Styria Regional Administrative Court ( Landesverwaltungsgericht Steiermark ), in accordance with the applicable legal provisions, declared that a request

Notably, the Criminal Court of Appeal found that the applicant had failed to respect the one-month time-limit for lodging an appeal because the time-limit in question had started running from the date

In an earlier application to the European Commission of Human Rights (no. 24783/94), the Commission had already found a violation of Article 6 because the applicant had not had his case examined within

The criminal court fined the applicant in the amount of 600 euro for refusing to testify without justification, because the applicant had been released from confidentiality by the liquidator of four of

communicated on 1 December 2025 SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE The application concerns the decision of the domestic courts to declare the applicant’s civil action for compensation for defamation inadmissible because