for the purposes of Article 34 of the Convention, of a prolongation of his preventive detention with retrospective effect, under a law enacted after he had committed his offence (compare also Meyer-Falk

Hüseyin Demir, Faik Kaplan et Şükrü Süsin, avaient saisi la Commission le 12 février 1993 en vertu de l’article 25.

Les noms des civils qui ont perdu leur vie sont les suivants   : Mehdi Duyar (20 mars, Cizre), Faik Aslan (20 mars, Sirvan), Hacı İbrahim Dilek (20 mars, Yolağzı), Behçet Ekinci (24 mars, Tatvan,

    In Falk v. the Netherlands (dec.), (no. 66273/01, 19 October 2004) the Court found that the registered owner's liability for minor traffic offences was not incompatible with Article 6 § 2

Germany , 21 February 1984, §§ 46-56, Series A no. 73; Falk v. the Netherlands (dec.), no. 66273/01, ECHR 2004-XI; and Ziliberberg v. Moldova , no. 61821/00, §§ 30-36, 1 February 2005).

xa0;       45868/11 20/06/2011 Ekrem YAMAL 02/11/0972 Diyarbakır   Arzu PAMUKÇU YÖRDEM             46281/11 17/06/2011 Faik

xa0; İnan AKMEŞE Article 5 § 4 de la Convention Dommage moral réclamé : 10 000 EUR (dix mille euros) Frais et dépens réclamé   : 7 434 TRY (environ 1   450 EUR)   43257/13 21 mai 2012 Faik

Germany , 21 February 1984, §§ 47-56, Series A no. 73; Falk v. Nederlands (dec.), no. 66273/01, ECHR 2004-XI, and Malige v. France , 23 September 1998, § 39, ECHR 1998 ‑ VII).

    The Court, even assuming that this part of the case is compatible ratione personae with the provisions of the Convention in all respects (compare in this respect, in particular, Meyer-Falk

aabenbare har enten selv vist, eller tilskyndet Andre til, Ulydighet mod Lovene, Ringeagt mod Religionen, Sædelighet eller de konstitutionelle Magter, Modstand mod disses Befalinger, eller fremført falske

In other words, the means employed have to be reasonably proportionate to the legitimate aim sought to be achieved (see Janosevic , cited above, § 101, and Falk v.

concrete enough, in particular regarding the length of detention and its specific circumstances, to enable the Court to assess whether such a measure was proportionate (see, mutatis mutandis , Meyer-Falk

originated in three applications (nos. 21380/93, 21381/93 and 21383/93) against the Republic of Turkey lodged with the Commission under Article   25 by three Turkish nationals, Mr Hüseyin Demir, Mr Faik

Falk , Ministry for Foreign Affairs, Ms   P. Herzfeld Olsson , Ministry of Industry, Employment and Communications, Advisers ; (b)     for the applicants Mr   P.

    Again leaving aside the question whether the requirements of Article   35 § 1 of the Convention have been met, the Court points out that in Falk v. the Netherlands (dec.), no. 66273/

  Türkiye 10/02/2020 Muhammed BİRİŞİK 1988 Malatya Turkish Faik BİRİŞİK 179. 11302/20 Güler v.   Türkiye 18/02/2020 Ramazan GÜLER 1987 Istanbul Turkish Burak ÇAĞ 180. 11476/20 Özdemir v.