However the Court did not find it appropriate to anticipate such an event, nor to decide that issue in theory at the present stage.

It is for the Government to show that the remedy was an effective one available in theory and in practice at the relevant time, that is to say, that it was accessible, was capable of providing redress

Honorat, Auditeur, - les observations de Me Luc-Thaler, avocat de M. Jacques X..., - les conclusions de M.

They all confirmed that verbal altercations between E.N. and her mother-in-law had been very frequent, and that they had indeed heard about E.N.’s unsuccessful attempt to hang herself in August 2017.

they constitute no less than 20% of the total club representatives.

Where there are reasonable grounds to suspect that an individual is concealing material evidence or items related to a criminal offence on his or her person, the court shall issue a warrant for a body

They claimed, however, that she had failed to exhaust the domestic remedies.

    The Court accepts that in the present case there is no indication that there was a positive intention on the part of the authorities to humiliate or debase the applicant but reitera tes that

They assert that the police beat them because they had taken photographs at the funeral after the police had started to use force against the people who had gathered there.   B.

Secondly, they pointed out that the application had been lodged on 5 January 2004, that is more than six months after the applicant had for the last time attempted to obtain enforcement of the judgment

He told Inspector D.B. that they could not deport him as he had expired documents and that he refused to be detained again. He also noted that judicial proceedings were pending.

It is incumbent on the Government claiming non-exhaustion to satisfy the Court that the remedy was an effective one available in theory and in practice at the relevant time, that is to say that it was

They alleged that   by   the “member of the SS” the applicant had meant D. S. The court therefore concluded that the applicant had interfered with D.

    The Government submitted that the application should be declared inadmissible. 22.     They pointed out that the applicant had been granted Danish citizenship on 3 July 2020.

They argued that the applicant's claims were contrary to the purpose of Article 41.

leaving him with a personal space of less than 3 sq. m throughout those thirty-six days.

the State to prove that the remedy they indicate has the requisites of accessibility and effectiveness.

and that therefore there was a risk of absconding. 25.

They disputed the very fact that there could have been any interference, arguing that the journalist working for the applicant company had voluntarily cooperated in the measure in issue in order to demonstrate