His religious beliefs were deeply held and he had a desire to convert others to his way of thinking.

According to the applicant, during the arrest three police officers handcuffed him and kicked him in the face and on the head.

He went on to say that in his view the teacher had done all that she could to help him adapt to the school, and that the head teacher had not discriminated against him either.

The Court accordingly held unanimously that there had been a violation of Article 8.

, by five votes to four, that there had been a breach of Article 1 of Protocol No. 1;         _ held, unanimously, that for lack of a fair trial there had been a breach of Article 6

There he was held with eleven other inmates in the same conditions as in the previous cell. A typical day on which a hearing was held in the applicant’s case was as follows.

Whereas in its judgment of 21 September 1993 the Court unanimously:        - joined the Government's preliminary objections to the merits;        - held

Officer D.P. then grabbed the applicant by his leg, and with the help of D.M. pulled the applicant out of the car whereby he fell on the ground, when the officers held his neck and elbow-locked his left

A hearing was held on 18 December 1992. The defendant requested that the proceedings be stayed pending a decision on its action of 8 October 1992. Another hearing was held on 27 January 1993.

On 8 June 1998 the court held a hearing. One of the co-accused did not appear. At the hearing held on 18 June 1998 one of the lawyers did not appear.

”, consisting of a video showing the cut-off, writhing head of a fish, and three photographs showing bloodied fish heads and fins lying on a plate; –     a large panel entitled “Hello Dolly!”

It held, in particular, that the applicant’s allegations that his imprisonment was politically motivated and associated with a risk to life and health were unsubstantiated.

Accordingly, the Court did not consider it necessary to award them a sum of money under that head. (The judgment is available only in French).   Brocco v. Italy (no. 68074/01) Del Duce v.

The Court had held a preparatory meeting beforehand. Mr R.

It was held that the State, in the person of the Ministry, had the standing to be sued in the case.

On 15 January 1991, after the court had held four hearings, the applicant's claim was upheld in part. 8.

    On 16 March 2006 the Kranj District Court held the first main hearing. 9.

    In the early 1990s, C. was the Head of the Office of the Government of Slovakia.

He complains that he was discriminated against by the head teacher and his teacher in the first two years of primary school from 2011 to 2013.