The applicants’ complaints under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention concerning the alleged lack of fairness of criminal proceedings against them and the applicant’s complaint in application no.

They also alleged that the terms of the 2008 agreement were discriminatory. However, their claims were rejected at first instance and on appeal as being out of time.

    ALLEGED VIOLATION OF ARTICLE 3 OF THE CONVENTION 27.

in an application (No. 36022/97) against the United Kingdom, lodged with the European Commission of Human Rights on 6 May 1997 under former Article 25 of the Convention by Ms   Ruth Hatton, Mr Peter

Germany (no. 40014/05)* The applicant, Peter Döring, is a German national who was born in 1956 and lives in Berlin.

  Complaint   The applicant alleged, in particular, that the dismissal of his claim for restitution of the coins violated Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 (protection of property) to the European

THE LAW ALLEGED VIOLATION OF aRTICLE 6 § 1 OF THE CONVENTION 23.

against Turkey   The European Court of Human Rights (Second Section), sitting on 28   January 2020 as a Committee composed of:   Valeriu Griţco, President,   Arnfinn Bårdsen,   Peeter

    He alleged that there were bugs and rats in the cell. 21.

44512/19 Kazim AVCI against Türkiye   The European Court of Human Rights (Second Section), sitting on 25   March 2025 as a Committee composed of:   Jovan Ilievski , President ,   Péter

He was allowed to have a one-hour period of outdoor exercise per day.

xa0; SECOND SECTION Application no. 29952/20 Resül YILDIRIM against Türkiye lodged on 22 June 2020 communicated on 14 November 2024 SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE The application concerns the applicant’s alleged

The applicants’ complaints under Articles 9 and 11 of the Convention concerning alleged breach of the right to freedom of religion and right to freedom of association, namely the right to form a religious

ALLEGED VIOLATION OF ARTICLE   11 OF THE CONVENTION 7.

ALLEGED VIOLATION OF ARTICLE   11 OF THE CONVENTION 7.

ALLEGED VIOLATION OF ARTICLE   11 OF THE CONVENTION 7.

ALLEGED VIOLATION OF ARTICLE   11 OF THE CONVENTION 7.

The Government submitted that it fell on the applicants to bring legal proceedings against the IPRO and the building residents to resolve the alleged conflict.

ALLEGED VIOLATION OF ARTICLE 6 § 1 OF THE CONVENTION 7.