Jebens,   Mr   G. Malinverni, judges, and Mr S.

    By a decision of 2 March 2006 the Court declared the application partly admissible. 5.

    The circumstances of the case The facts of the case, as submitted by the parties, may be summarised as follows.

It may be subject to editorial revision.   In the case of Maksimov v.

statement of the first applicant’s neighbour Mrs M.M., provided on 23 March 2004; witness statement of the applicants’ relative Mrs A.R., provided on 27   March 2003; hand-drawn map of the first applicant

It may be subject to editorial revision . In the case of Asadulayeva and Others v.

    According to the Government, on 10 May 2004 the investigating authorities questioned Ms P., the applicants' neighbour, who stated that in March 2003 she had been working as a yard-cleaner

    Le 30 mai 1997, le procureur près la cour d'appel d'Athènes confirma la décision attaquée.

    On 30   March 2017 he was transferred to Enner Mark Prison.

Against the latter authority’s decision the party may bring an action in the Administrative Court, and if the authority fails to give a decision, the party may bring an administrative action under the

judgment may be subject to editorial revision.

It may relate not only to the actual existence of a right but also to its scope and the manner of its exercise.

is final but may be subject to editorial revision.

    On 21 March 2005 the Prosecutor’s Office of the Chechen Republic quashed the decision to suspend the investigation of 1 March 2004 and resumed the proceedings.

It may be subject to editorial revision. In the case of Sevastyanov v.

Ms   Margvelashvili testified that the man who had called and threatened her in the morning of 8 August 2000 was not the applicant but Mr Berkadze. 59.

Jebens , judges , and Mr S. Nielsen , Section Registrar , Having deliberated in private on 19 May 2005, Delivers the following judgment, which was adopted on that date: PROCEDURE 1.

  In March 1998 the applicant was refused access to a written examination on one of the subjects she was studying because was wearing the Islamic headscarf.

He is represented before the Court by Mr   Mads Jensen and Mr Niels-Erik Hansen, lawyers practising in Copenhagen. A.