Turkey (application no. 46221/99) for referral to the Grand Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights under Article 43 [1] of the European Convention on Human Rights following a request by the applicant

  The case has been struck out following a friendly settlement in which 40,000 French francs inclusive of costs and expenses is to be paid to the applicant on an ex gratia basis.

Following a number of hearings which were not attended by the applicant, as of October 2010 evidence started to be collected via letters rogatory with different jurisdictions.

De Gaetano, President,   Georges Ravarani,   Marko Bošnjak, judges, and Andrea Tamietti, Deputy Section Registrar, Having deliberated in private on 27 June 2017, Delivers the following judgment

The suspension of the applicant’s pre-trial detention was made subject to the following conditions: “1.

Following the applicants' requests for increased compensation, the national courts awarded them additional compensation plus an interest at the statutory rate of 30 % per annum.

  In July 1974, following an amendment of Turkish legislation on the delimitation of forests, the case was referred back to the court for new expert opinions concerning the disputed land.

Twelve questions had been asked, forming a clear whole which left no ambiguity as to the charges against the applicant.

Twelve questions had been asked, forming a clear whole which left no ambiguity as to the charges against the applicant.

In addition, the ill-treatment had been inflicted with the aim of forcing him to confess.

The court based its judgment on the following evidence: (i)   the statements of witnesses confirming that the house had been owned by Mr   Z.L.; (ii) statements given by the previous owners of

Following the above, a motorised police patrol from Košice arrived at the first applicant’s house where both applicants were present.

0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; line-height:normal; widows:0; orphans:0; font-size:8.5pt } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial }  The European Commission of Human Rights sitting in private on 3 March 1986, the following

Ukraine - 8838/20 Judgment 26.6.2025 [Section V] Article 6 Article 6-1 Fair hearing Deficient review by Supreme Court of applicant’s conviction following the Court’s finding of a violation in the initial

        against the Netherlands       The European Commission of Human Rights (Second Chamber) sitting in private on 11 January 1994, the following members being present

, the following applied to proof of prescription from time immemorial.

However, following two assessments of Ruben during the school year, his parents were informed on 17 June 1988 that he would not be allowed to continue at the school.

The applicants allege that the policemen exerted pressure on him, forcing to confess and to sign some other procedural documents.

xa0;        against Sweden             The European Commission of Human Rights sitting in private on 1 July 1991, the following