If so, what was the time-limit for such an action and when did it start to run in the applicants’ cases?

In any event, the witness’s statements had not been the only evidence on which the trial and appeal judges had based the applicant’s conviction.

  10152/10, the Court notes that the applicant died on 22 March 2012, while the case was pending before the Court.

It did not entail use of force, or public exposure, exceeding what could reasonably be considered necessary in the circumstances.

The proceedings against one of them, B.B., were later dismissed by another state attorney who found that domestic legislation required B.B., as a minor, to be prosecuted by the State after all.

More specifically, on the question of excessive delay in civil proceedings, the Court has consistently held that, while an unreasonable delay in enforcing a binding judgment may be contrary to the Convention

suggested by the Government, general provisions (such as those set out in Articles   24 and 33(1) of the Code of Administrative Procedure) entitling individuals to seek injunctive relief against State

The Court further notes that factors such as the conduct of the applicant and what is at stake for him or her in the dispute together with other relevant aspects may affect in various degrees the award

While accepting the divorce, he argued that he had moved to Vukovar in October 2007 for work and that D. had refused to move with him.

It enclosed a statement from the victim’s mother who had given the written consent to having her daughter’s personal details published.

Accordingly, he did not know which witnesses the prosecution had interviewed and what declarations had been made. He therefore had no reason to call R. T. and P.

While the relevant proceedings were pending (between 2006 and 2013), he was convicted of indecent assault and attempted indecent assault several times.

an observation cell without prior warning and without use made strictly necessary by his conduct: violation Facts – Pepper spray was used by two prison guards on the applicant, a prisoner on remand, while

In view of what was at stake for the applicant company, that is the contestation of the value of its property used to pay out loans taken from a bank, the Court considers that the case was of importance

The Court notes, however, that the present application is directed against a State that has ratified the Convention and against a decision by the State authorities to decrease the applicant’s pension.

Police officer G.H. made similar statements in his testimony dated 2   March 2008.

found disclose a breach by the State concerned of its obligations under the Convention.

What the Court needs to ascertain in a given case is whether the nature of the time-limit in question and the manner in which it was applied are compatible with the Convention.

On 28 March 2002 the applicant lodged an appeal with the Stuttgart Regional Court.

    States can entitle prosecutors to defend the interest of the State (principle of protection of State interest). 5.