Violation of Article 6 - Right to a fair trial (Article 6 - Criminal proceedings;Article 6-1 - Fair hearing)

At those hearings the applicant was heard via an interpreter but without defence counsel, and no witnesses were called.

    In the determination of ... any criminal charge against him, everyone is entitled to a fair ... hearing ... by an independent and impartial tribunal ...” 24.

His request was not mentioned in the transcript of the hearing. 12.     On 9 June 2009 the parties made their closing statements at the hearing before the Economic Court of Appeal.

Violation of Article 6 - Right to a fair trial (Article 6 - Criminal proceedings;Article 6-1 - Fair hearing)

Violation of Article 6 - Right to a fair trial (Article 6 - Civil proceedings;Article 6-1 - Fair hearing)

    According to the transcript of the hearing, the applicant, who was represented by a State-funded lawyer, refused to give a statement.

It held that hearing these witnesses was unnecessary, because there was sufficient evidence in the file for the applicant to support his defence.

They relied on Article 6 §   1 of the Convention, the relevant part of which reads as follows: “In the determination of his civil rights and obligations ... everyone is entitled to a fair ... hearing

relied on Article   6 § 1 of the Convention, which reads as follows: Article   6   §   1 “In the determination of his civil rights and obligations ... everyone is entitled to a ... hearing

Violation of Article 6 - Right to a fair trial (Article 6 - Criminal proceedings;Article 6-1 - Fair hearing)

He argued that he had been unlawfully denied an opportunity to participate in them, since he had been unable to attend the hearing before the five-member panel of the Supreme Administrative Court.

relied on Article 6 § 1 of the Convention, which reads as follows: Article   6   §   1 “In the determination of ... any criminal charge against him, everyone is entitled to a fair ... hearing

    The applicants complained that the enactment of Law no. 296/2006 had violated their right to a fair hearing under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention and constituted an unjustified interference

    The applicant complained that his right to a fair hearing had been breached on account of the domestic courts’ failure to properly and timeously notify him of hearings in the civil proceedings

In convicting the second applicant they also relied on the statements by R.P., the main witness and participant to the test purchase, without hearing her (compare Grba , cited above, §   119, and

relied on Article 6 § 1 of the Convention, which reads as follows: Article   6   §   1 “In the determination of ... any criminal charge against him, everyone is entitled to a fair ... hearing

    After hearing the victim, the applicant and numerous witnesses and examining all the available evidence, the first instance court acquitted the applicant. 4.

Violation of Article 6 - Right to a fair trial (Article 6 - Civil proceedings;Article 6-1 - Fair hearing)