had been a breach of Article 6 para. 1 (art. 6-1) of the Convention, (ii) bringing to a speedy conclusion the proceedings in question, (iii) recognising the existence of pecuniary and non-pecuniary damage

Such limited physical interaction had further been compounded by the fact that they had been under the constant observation of a guard.

Article 998 “Any act committed by a person which causes damage to another shall render the person through whose fault the damage was caused liable to make reparation for it.”

    On 30 July 2002 the applicant filed a civil action for damages against the Treasury of the Russian Federation.

They emphasised that this damage was only imputable to the lesser yield of the parcels provisionally allocated to them.

Inmates were under strict, almost constant, supervision. They were routinely searched on admission and all their personal belongings were confiscated.

Finally, the minutes of the 2011 meeting of the Cantonal State Council recommended that a person voicing suicidal intentions should be placed in a double-occupancy cell or, if necessary, kept under constant

Article   41: claim for pecuniary damage dismissed; EUR   5,070 to the first applicant, EUR   8,450 to the second applicant, EUR   12,350 to the third applicant and EUR   6,000

  In this respect the Commission refers to its constant jurisprudence (see e.g. the decisions on the admissibility of applications Nos. 172/56, Yearbook 1 pp. 211, 215, and 3925/69, Collection of

examination of the applicants and found that the children in particular – and especially Khadizha – were showing serious psychological and psychotraumatic symptoms and should be released to limit the damage

CA CONSUMER FINANCE C/ [U] [Y] [Z] [J] Copie exécutoire délivrée le : à : Me Sylvain DAMAZ Décision déférée à la Cour : Jugement du

MARSEILLE Pôle de Proximité JUGEMENT DU : 30 Septembre 2024 Président : Mme MANACH, Greffier : Mme SCANNAPIECO, Débats en audience publique le : 22 Juillet 2024 GROSSE : Le 30/09/24 à Me DAMAZ

CA CONSUMER FINANCE Copie exécutoire délivrée le : à : Me Laura DONSIMONI Me Sylvain DAMAZ de l'AARPI ADSL Décision déférée à la Cour : Jugement

Janvier 2025 Président : Madame Christine ZARB, Vice-Présidente Greffier : Madame Anaïs ALI, Greffier Débats en audience publique le : 10 Octobre 2024 GROSSE : Le 09 Janvier 2025 à Me Sylvain DAMAZ

authorities under section 284(1) whose decisions, actions or omissions have caused the damage. 3.

She claimed damages for serious personal injury, loss and damage sustained by reason of the defendant’s negligence and breach of duty in managing her labour and in failing to obtain her lawful and proper

    In this connection the Court reiterates that according to its constant case-law a person who has obtained an enforcement title against the State cannot be required to resort to enforcement

Moreover, it is not feasible to authorise the return of the property for Mr   Stephens to reside in, owing to the security implications and the severe damage to the property.”

The certificate stated that the child (born in 1991) suffered from neurogenic bladder dysfunction and that she was in need of her parent’s constant care. 9.