In both cases State-funded lawyers were appointed to assist the applicant.

  In both cases, the European Court of Human Rights held unanimously that there had been a violation of Article 6 § 1 and awarded the applicants the amounts listed below in Finnish marks (FIM).

Both applicants claimed that the heroin had been for their personal use and that the items which they had handed to their neighbour had not been drugs.

Both statements concerned the alleged criminality and lawlessness of a large part of the Roma community in Bulgaria, its allegedly systemic failure to pay taxes and utility bills, and its alleged abuse

A D, représenté par Me Bohner, demande au tribunal : 1°) de prononcer son admission provisoire à l'aide juridictionnelle ; 2°) d'annuler l'arrêté du 14 novembre 2022 par lequel la préfète du Bas-Rhin

A... et la SCI du Jardin Botanique aux dépens des pourvois ; Vu l'article 700 du code de procédure civile, condamne les époux Z...

    Summary of the judgments [2]   Complaint   In both cases, the applicant company relied on Article 10 of the Convention.

On 5 November 1996 the applicant applied for a stay of both proceedings and for judicial review of the Secretary of State’s decision not to accept undertakings in lieu of both the Section 6 and the Section

  Both applicants are Lithuanian nationals, born respectively in 1962 and 1972 and living in Kaunas, Lithuania.

The applicant's hearing with both ears was reduced. According to the doctor, the applicant's diagnosis was traumatic rupture of the left tympanum membrane and neuritis of both auditory nerves.

The applicant’s submissions were made in writing before both levels of jurisdiction in both sets of proceedings; they were also formulated in a clear and precise manner.

Il y a lieu, dans les circonstances de l'espèce, sous réserve que Me Bohner, avocate de M.

The Court further decided that both parties were responsible for the breaking up of the marriage.

Booth of Messrs.   Booth Bennett as solicitor under legal aid.   This solicitor was not chosen by the applicant.   On 27 June 1985, the applicant was committed for trial.

  No such limitation applied to the Supreme Court's jurisdiction with regard to sentencing, which comprised both questions of facts and of law.   25.

Rémi BOTTIN M. Alain MAURIES assistés de M.

Rémi BOTTIN M. Alain MAURIES assistés de M.

Botin ratkaisuehdotus 7.3.2018.#Petronas Lubricants Italy SpA vastaan Livio Guida.#Corte di Appello di Torinon esittämä ennakkoratkaisupyyntö.

The Zurich Migration Office dismissed the applicant’s request for reunification of both mother and son, stating that the deadline to apply for family reunification (particularly for the wife) had been