32, paragraph 4 (art. 32-4), of the Convention to abide by them;     Whereas the Government of Italy recalled that measures had already been taken to prevent the repetition of the violation

32, paragraph 4 (art. 32-4), of the Convention to abide by them;     Whereas the Government of Italy recalled that measures had already been taken to prevent the repetition of the violation

32, paragraph 4 (art. 32-4), of the Convention to abide by them;     Whereas the Government of Italy recalled that measures had already been taken to prevent the repetition of the violation

32, paragraph 4 (art. 32-4), of the Convention to abide by them;     Whereas the Government of Italy recalled that measures had already been taken to prevent the repetition of the violation

invited the Government of Italy to inform it of the measures taken following its decisions of 17 November 1995 and 15 December 1995, having regard to Italy's obligation under Article 32, paragraph 4 (

32, paragraph 4 (art. 32-4), of the Convention to abide by them;     Whereas the Government of Italy recalled that measures had already been taken to prevent the repetition of the violation

invited the Government of Italy to inform it of the measures taken following its decisions of 17 November 1995 and 15 December 1995, having regard to Italy's obligation under Article 32, paragraph 4 (

32, paragraph 4 (art. 32-4), of the Convention to abide by them;     Whereas the Government of Italy recalled that measures had already been taken to prevent the repetition of the violation

invited the Government of Italy to inform it of the measures taken following its decisions of 17 November 1995 and 15 December 1995, having regard to Italy's obligation under Article 32, paragraph 4 (

32, paragraph 4 (art. 32-4), of the Convention to abide by them;     Whereas the Government of Italy recalled that measures had already been taken to prevent the repetition of the violation

32, paragraph 4 (art. 32-4), of the Convention to abide by them;     Whereas the Government of Italy recalled that measures had already been taken to prevent the repetition of the violation

d'elle peut avoir l'une pour l'autre ; alors, encore, que l'important délai séparant la consolidation du 10 novembre 1987, date de mise en oeuvre par la société Flamand de la procédure visée aux articles

des Ministres a invité le Gouvernement de l’Etat défendeur à l’informer des mesures prises à la suite de sa décision du 15 avril 1999, eu égard à l’obligation qu’a la France de s’y conformer selon l’article

32, paragraphe 1, de la Convention s'est écoulé sans que l'affaire ait été déférée à la Cour européenne des Droits de l'Homme en application de l'article 48 de la Convention;     Attendu que

L. 412-2 du code des communes et mentionnés au 4 de l'article 32, au 4 de l'article 33 et au 4 de l'article 34, qui, ayant l'ancienneté de services exigée ne possèdent pas le diplôme requis ou qui, possédant

L. 412-2 du code des communes et mentionnés au 4 de l'article 32, au 4 de l'article 33 et au 4 de l'article 34, qui, ayant l'ancienneté de services exigée ne possèdent pas le diplôme requis ou qui, possédant

. 32-1), de la Convention, qu'il y avait eu dans cette affaire violation de l'article 5, paragraphes 1 et 4 (art. 5-1, art. 5-4), de la Convention, mais non pas de l'article 5, paragraphe 2 (art. 5-2);

32, paragraphe 1 (art. 32-1), de la Convention, qu'il y avait eu dans cette affaire violation de l'article 5, paragraphe 4 (art. 5-4), de la Convention;        Attendu que le