The compensation proceedings Both applicants applied to the Court of Appeal in January 1998, each seeking monetary compensation in an amount of 31,200 NLG (Netherlands guilders) for the time spent

In the Court’s view, both section   6(5) of the Prevention of Terrorist Act and the court orders had stemmed from the hypothesis that the applicants, whose “guilt” was established without trial in

  Merits of the complaint In present case, applicant had not paid fixed fine and partial loss of points thus depended on finding of his guilt being made by criminal courts – in Versailles Police Court

However, it found that the police interviews provided sufficient evidence for the applicant’s guilt to be established. The applicant unsuccessfully lodged an appeal with the Supreme Court.

  No hearing in Supreme Court Grounds of appeal, as formulated by applicant, raised no question of fact bearing on assessment of applicant's guilt or innocence but challenged trial court's assessment

The applicant also complained that his family life and his reputation had been seriously impaired because of the prolonged uncertainty as to his guilt.

first-instance court’s conclusions as to the subjective elements of the offences (the knowledge of the irregularity of the acts), a question of fact which resulted decisive for the assessment of the applicant’s guilt

Latvia - 35726/10 Judgment 14.3.2019 [Section V] Article 6 Article 6-2 Presumption of innocence Finding of guilt for repeat offence while appeal against original offence still pending: violation Facts

Attesting witnesses were expected to have no knowledge of the case and did not testify about the circumstances of the case or the defendants’ guilt or innocence.

The witness’s description of the events constituted the sole, and thus decisive, evidence on which the trial court’s findings of the applicant’s guilt were based.

PARTIES EN CAUSE : Madame [N] [W] née le 10 Septembre 1976 à LAHRAR BOUZNIKA BENSLIMANE (MAROC) demeurant [Adresse 2] DEMANDERESSE Représenté par Me Hélène GUILLIER, avocat au barreau de BESANCON

administrative offence proceedings, on 19 October 2015 the Chișinău Court of Appeal finally discontinued the proceedings in respect of M., concluding that there was insufficient evidence to establish her guilt

On 3 November 2020 the applicant’s complaints under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention concerning proceedings in which the applicant’s guilt for a traffic accident had been determined, in particular complaints

that there had been a violation of paragraph 3 of Article 5 (art. 5-3);        - held that the Netherlands were to pay to the applicant, within three months, 11 626   guilders

Upholding the trial court’s findings as to the applicants’ guilt, it imposed prison sentences on them.

with Article 32, paragraph   2, of the Convention, that the Government of the respondent State was to pay the applicant as just satisfaction, within three months, the sum of 2   700 Dutch guilders

The trial court found that the sole evidence against him – the statement of the individual in whose flat the drugs had been discovered – was insufficient under domestic law and practice to establish guilt

additional expert evidence (including additional DNA examination), satisfied, in particular, that the testimonies of the witnesses during pre-trial and trial were sufficient to establish the applicant’s guilt