In this regard the national authorities have the benefit of direct contact with all the persons concerned, often at the very stage when care measures are being envisaged or immediately after their implementation

    The Government considers that this amount will be an adequate redress and sufficient compensation for the impugned violations and thus, will constitute the final settlement of the present

The Latvian Government (“the Government”) were represented by their Agent, Mrs I.   Reine. The facts of the case, as submitted by the applicant, may be summarised as follows.

The Bulgarian Government (“the Government”) were represented by their Agent, Ms M. Dimova, of the Ministry of Justice.

In that sense, there was no discrimination in the applicants’ case and their grievances were of an abstract nature because their sentences had been determined in accordance with the gravity of the crimes

The German Government (“the Government”) were represented by their Deputy Agent, Mr H.-J. Behrens, Ministerialrat , of the Federal Ministry of Justice.

The applicant did not submit a cassation appeal against this judgment to the Senate of the Supreme Court.

placed in preventive detention prior to the entry into force of the new provision and had not yet finished serving their sentences, were compatible with the Basic Law.

the death of his parents and the destruction of their property.

They argued that the use of this surgery interfered with their rights under this provision by reason of the noise and smells resulting from its operation, as well as the constant stream of patients which

a civil society in the country by raising this issue in the media.

  Under Article 41 (just satisfaction) of the Convention, the Court awarded the applicants the reimbursement of the sums they had been ordered to pay on their conviction by the French courts: 21,000

    The Croatian Government (“the Government”) were represented by their Agent, Ms Š. Stažnik. The circumstances of the case 3.

In its view, this amount would constitute adequate redress and sufficient compensation for the impugned length of the said proceedings, and thus a reasonable sum as to quantum in the present case in the

In its view, this amount would constitute adequate redress and sufficient compensation for the impugned length of the said proceedings, and thus a reasonable sum as to quantum in the present case in the

In its view, this amount would constitute adequate redress and sufficient compensation for the impugned length of the said proceedings, and thus a reasonable sum as to quantum in the present case in the

In its view, this amount would constitute adequate redress and sufficient compensation for the impugned length of the said proceedings, and thus a reasonable sum as to quantum in the present case in the

In its view, this amount would constitute adequate redress and sufficient compensation for the impugned length of the said proceedings, and thus a reasonable sum as to quantum in the present case in the

In its view, this amount would constitute adequate redress and sufficient compensation for the impugned length of the said proceedings, and thus a reasonable sum as to quantum in the present case in the

In its view, this amount would constitute adequate redress and sufficient compensation for the impugned length of the said proceedings, and thus a reasonable sum as to quantum in the present case in the