However, this matter could have only been examined if the appeal on points of law had been admissible.

However, no factual basis could have been deduced from the accompanying headlines.

On 25 October 1999, the applicant’s wife received news that her husband had been arrested and would be deported to Iran.

Thus, his appeal had been rejected erroneously.   He further submitted that this decision had been served on him only in August 1998.

.° 1 — Redução do preço depois de a operação ter sido efetuada — Regulamentação nacional que subordina a redução do valor tributável à posse, pelo fornecedor de bens ou de serviços, de um comprovativo

The impugned detention had therefore been in violation of Article 5 § 3.

The Court noted, furthermore, that, in breach of domestic law, the applicant had not been served with the order declaring his presence to be undesirable until after he had been deported.

COMPLAINTS The applicant complained under Article   5 §   3 of the Convention that his detention on remand had been excessively long.

S.’s mother stated that S. had been very disturbed after her music lesson and that she had later confided in her mother.

    Article 218 § 2 enables a party whose request has not been decided within the periods established in the previous paragraph to lodge an appeal, as if his request had been denied.

Berger , Section Registrar , Having deliberated in private on 11 May 2000, Delivers the following judgment, which was adopted on that date: PROCEDURE 1.

In September 1995 they applied to the Administrative Court, arguing that the DVNI had not been authorised to make the assessment.

been adequately resolved.

The applicant had been assisted by the same defence counsel throughout the proceedings and had also been personally informed of the hearing on the appeal.

    Holds that there has been a violation of Article 6 § 1 of the Convention;   3.     Holds that there has been a violation of Article 13 of the Convention;   4.

    Holds that there has been a violation of Article 6 § 1 of the Convention;   3.     Holds that there has been a violation of Article 13 of the Convention;   4.

The Court therefore finds no reason to conclude that there has been a breach of any provision of the Convention in relation to this complaint.

They pointed out that, on the day of the search, there had been a violent demonstration during which the doors and the windows of the Party building had been broken. 11.

    Holds that there has been a violation of Article 6 § 1 of the Convention;   3.     Holds that there has been a violation of Article 13 of the Convention;   4.