During the hearing of the witnesses the presiding judge denied the applicant the right to put questions to the witnesses personally as he was legally represented in court.

Convention, that from 2004 onwards, over the course of several years, the domestic authorities deprived her and the second and third applicants of the financial and material support to which they were legally

Therefore, relying on Article 386 of the CCP, which allowed the courts to change the legal characterization of the facts during the trial, the court of appeal legally recharacterized the facts as a single

The [applicant’s] argument, that [Mr and Ms S.’s] marriage was [only legally] terminated in 2010 meaning that all their property was jointly owned, is of no legal significance in the context of this dispute

; The Constitutional Court held that Members of Parliament were entitled to carry out their office and that they had the right to resign, provided that it was their genuine will, by means that were legally

For those reasons, the Commission held that the restitution order had been contrary to sections 1 and 2 of the Restitution Act and legally unenforceable in view of section 267 § 1 (3) of the Administrative

It was possible for the applicant, who was legally represented throughout the proceedings, to present all the facts and arguments both of procedural and substantive law that could, in his view, secure

  The applicants appealed against that decision in 2004 but were unsuccessful, as the Court of Appeal rejected their argument that, since they had been minors, it had been legally impossible for them

principle to be retained for life, even when one or more of the children ceased to be attached to the family and regardless of the children’s nationality (provided the mother lived permanently and legally

In the proceedings before the Court she is not legally represented. She provisionally appointed as her representative her cousin, Mr   Sławski, who is an engineer.

The Government submitted that the constitutional complaint concerned dealt with a legally and constitutionally very complex and difficult subject matter.

The UAR was a legally constituted body, invested with administrative as well as rule-making prerogatives and which pursued an aim of general interest in relation to the legal profession.

The Home Office Guidelines which existed were neither legally binding nor were they directly publicly accessible.

The applicant was legally represented. On 16   September 1998 the applicant was found guilty of neglect of duty and received a reprimand.

Even if refused legal aid, the family had been legally represented throughout the proceedings by experienced counsel.

A number of the other applicants also brought proceedings which were stayed pending a legally enforceable decision in the case brought by the first seven applicants.

It found no grounds on which to grant the applicant asylum: it observed that the applicant’s story was inconsistent and that he had left Uganda legally.

    Did the applicants have a fair hearing in the determination of their civil rights and obligations, in accordance with Article 6 § 1 of the Convention, in so far as factually and legally similar

On 22 November 2007 the same Municipal Court ruled in favour of M.Ð., one of the Plaintiffs, even though his claim was factually and legally identical to the applicant’s claim (M.Ð.’s administrative decision

As they did not have the legally required documents, they were refused entry and the Aliens Office issued directions for their removal on 19   March 2011.