On 30 March 2011 the study was completed.

By letters of 22 March 2012 and 6 September 2012, the respondent Government informed the Court that, according to the findings of an inquiry carried out by the Ukrainian authorities, the judgment of 11

   Incident report of 25 March 1993   53.

    The applicant’s detention in remand prison IZ-18/1 Between 17   March 2006 and 12   March 2008 the applicant was detained in remand centre   IZ-18/1 of Izhevsk.

On 6 March 2004 the applicant purchased the cafe from N.J., who had previously purchased it from V.A.

In the absence of such a finding, the punishment would be devoid of purpose.

November 2023 SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE The applications concern the alleged unfairness of the proceedings before the Supreme Court for review of the applicants’ convictions based on the Court’s findings

On 22 March 2005 the Svitlovodsk Court allowed his claim in part.

    Background to the case On 9 March 1995 the applicant imported from Italy (for the price of 45,300 German marks) a cargo truck manufactured in 1990 and sought that the Customs Office of the

    On 18 March 1998 S.D. was questioned again.

Moreover, the findings regarding the applicant’s drunkenness were made on the basis of laboratory tests.

They were also stayed between 19   March 1998 and 3 April 2000 and between 25 September 2000 and 2   April 2001. 7.

The applicants, relying on the Court’s findings in its judgment of 28 September 1995 in the case of Procola v.

The Constitutional Court upheld those findings.

sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic }   Communicated on 13 September 2017 and 18 April 2018   FOURTH SECTION Application no. 14411/16 Igor OSKIRKO against Lithuania lodged on 9 March

insufficient reasoning by the High Court when deciding to freeze the applicant’s bank accounts and forbid him to dispose of his property in Montenegro, in spite of two Constitutional Court decisions finding

avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .sA1D3DA2E { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:justify } Communicated on 10 February 2020 Published on 2 March

Between 23 and 26 November 1998 the Commission carried out a fact-finding visit to Kiev and Ivano-Frankivsk Prison.

In a final judgment of 31 March 2008, the Supreme Administrative Court quashed those two refusals, finding that the Primorsko municipal council had been obliged to sell the shop and land to the applicant