On 14 November 2012 the Chernihiv Regional Court of Appeal upheld the District Court’s decision, as did the High Specialised Civil and Criminal Court on 6 March 2014. 2.

Did the alleged failure to give treatment with Spinraza in a timely fashion result in physical and (or) mental sufferings of the aforementioned applicants?

    The first applicant and the second and third applicants’ legal heirs (see paragraph 2 above) did not submit any observations. 8 .

  In the case of Mária Somogyi v.

The Government in their observations did not question those findings or produce any evidence proving otherwise.

    The Government did not express a view. 41.

    The applicant in the second case, Ms Sandra Maria da Costa Torrezão, is a Portuguese national, who was born on 7 September 1984 and lives in Setúbal. A.

  Apparently, the court did not address the issue at that time.

The court held that the conditions for the admissibility of their extraordinary appeal were not met as the judgment under review did not refer to the merits of their restitution claims but to the non &

They alleged that the compensation they received did not reflect the real increase in inflation during the period between the date the amount was fixed and the date of payment.

Kalaydjieva, judges, and Claudia Westerdiek, Section Registrar , Having regard to the above application lodged on 12 January 2006, Having deliberated, decides as follows: THE FACTS The applicant, Ms Maria

It did not generally demand that joint custody be awarded to parents after divorce.

She did so on 21 September 2004, arguing that the court had erred in finding that the house could be divided.

  According to four of them, section 62 (9) of Law no. 947/1977 did not apply to improvements brought about by the building of interchanges, and consequently the adjoining owners did not derive any

For the avoidance of doubt, they confirmed that the agreement to settle the applications did not constitute an admission that there had been a violation. THE LAW 8.

page-break-after:avoid } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } Published on 16 September 2024   FIRST SECTION Application no. 13935/22 Maria

  (b)     Did the national authorities s trike a fair balance between the applicants’ right to freedom of expression as guaranteed by Article 10 of the Convention and any competing interest

  On the dates specified in the appendix, the applicants and their representatives informed the Court that the IPC award in the applicants’ favour had been duly executed and that therefore they did

Cour européenne des droits de l’homme (quatrième section), siégeant le 26   avril 2022 en un comité composé de   :   Armen Harutyunyan, président,   Jolien Schukking,   Ana Maria