from the crime scene, leaving the victim in distress and covering up of the crime are the articles [of the Criminal Code] that will probably form the basis of Levan Gogichaishvili’s conviction if his guilt

to section 34 of the Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994, directed the jury that they could draw adverse inferences from the applicant’s failure to answer questions that “might point towards guilt

In his appeal the applicant denied that he had committed the offences and claimed that there had been no proper evidence of his guilt.

E F, représenté par Me Guillier, demande au tribunal dans le dernier état de ses écritures ; 1°) d'annuler l'arrêté en date du 21 mai 2024 par lequel le préfet de Seine-et-Marne lui a fait obligation

A B, représenté par Me Guillier (AARPI Novlaw Avocats), demande au tribunal : 1°) d'annuler l'arrêté du 24 août 2024 par lequel le préfet de police a refusé de lui délivrer un titre de séjour, l'a obligé

   On his submission that the Court’s finding of a violation would mean that he should have been acquitted for lack of evidence, the applicant claimed compensation of 150,000 Dutch guilders for

Thus, the former husband’s guilt was not proven and the principle of presumption of innocence was violated.

    An inference from failure to give evidence cannot on its own prove guilt. That is expressly stated in section 38(3) of the Act. 4.

The body composed of the professional judges and the jury now deliberates on the issue of guilt.

  The applicant contends therefore that these courts could not be considered to be impartial within the meaning of Article 6 of the Convention when deciding on his guilt.   B.

APPELANT : Monsieur [X] [I] né le 15 Mai 1961 à [Localité 5] [Adresse 4] [Localité 1] Représenté par Me Céline GUILLE de la SELARL CELINE GUILLE, avocat au barreau de NIMES INTIMÉE : S.E.L.A.R.L

case before the Grand Chamber; Whereas under the above-mentioned friendly settlement it was agreed that the Government of the Netherlands would pay the applicant, the global sum of 6 302,75 Dutch guilders

application, but court refused to declare experts’ evidence inadmissible, on ground that phrases challenged did not prove that they had prejudged merits of case or expressed their opinion as to defendant’s guilt

Law – Article 6 §   1 and 3   (c): Where an appellate court is called upon to examine a case as to the facts and the law and to make a full assessment of the issue of guilt or innocence it should

The applicant admitted his guilt.

Despite acknowledging his guilt in the robberies, the applicant denied that he had intended to kill the victim.

abolition of the then applicable executive order – as a result of the changed circumstances in Syria after the time of the crime – was based on external factors that had no relevance to the question of guilt

Although it was not for the Court to state its view on the assessment of the applicant’s guilt or the probative value of the statements in issue, it nevertheless observed that the National Security Court

The applicant further complained that having been found ineligible to inherit his late father’s estate due to the declaration of his guilt, his right to the peaceful enjoyment of his possessions (Article

/ à Mme Slavka Karabuljevic, domiciliée 20 avenue des Métiers, 27320 Nonancourt, 28 / à Mme Safiye Akman, domiciliée 22 rue de Dampierre, 28350 Saint-Lubin des Joncherets, 29 / à Mme Jocelyne Guillo