He also said that he had read leaflets distributed by Sinn Fein which advised those arrested for terrorist offences not to speak to the police during interviews at Castlereagh Police Office.

proceedings may be awarded if they are incurred by an applicant in order to try to prevent the violation found by the Court or to obtain redress therefor (see, among other authorities, Le Compte, Van Leuven

The principle that a tribunal shall be presumed to be free of personal prejudice or partiality is long established in the case-law of the Court (see, for example, Le Compte, Van Leuven and De Meyere v.

Court HR., Le Compte, Van Leuven and De Meyere v. Belgium judgment of 23 June 1984, Series A no. 43, pp. 22-23, para. 51).

their term of office, the existence of guarantees against outside pressures and the question whether the body presents an appearance of independence (see, inter alia , the Le   Compte, Van   Leuven

Court, the Court notes that the principle that a tribunal shall be presumed to be free of personal prejudice or partiality is long established in the Court’s case-law (see, for example, Le Compte, Van Leuven

directly decisive for the right in question: mere tenuous connections or remote consequences are not sufficient to bring Article 6 § 1 into play (see, for example, the following judgments: Le Compte, Van Leuven

Court HR, Le Compte, Van Leuven and De Meyere v.

free of personal prejudice or bias and must also be impartial from an objective viewpoint in that it must offer sufficient guarantees to exclude any legitimate doubt in this respect. ( Le Compte, Van Leuven

In any event, the finding of a violation, contained in the present judgment, has already furnished sufficient redress for the alleged non-pecuniary loss (see, mutatis mutandis, the Le Compte, Van Leuven

Le Compte, Van Leuven and De Meyere judgment of 23 June 1981, Series A no. 43, p. 24, para. 55 and Campbell and Fell judgment of 28 June 1984, Series A no. 80, para. 78, p. 39-40).   76.

   In the alternative, the Government submitted, at the hearings on 23 May 1984, that the Court should not disregard its previous case-law; they relied essentially on the Le Compte, Van Leuven

Accordingly, a separate complaint, and not merely a further legal submission or argument, was involved (see mutatis mutandis, the Le Compte, Van Leuven and De Meyere judgment of 23 June 1981, Series A

    The Tribunal found that the Article 6 complaint was ill-founded because, following Le Compte, Van Leuven and De Meyere v.

Nevertheless, and in contrast to what occurred in the case of Le Compte, Van Leuven and De Meyere to which the Government referred (see the judgment of 18 October 1982, Series A no. 54, p.10, § 21), the

Zwei Herren, Vater und       Sohn L., waren angeklagt, mittels betrügerischer Verträge Leuten       für Eigentumswohnungen in Althäusern Geld herausgerissen

  Court H.R., Deweer judgment of 27 February 1980, Series A no. 35, p. 25, para. 49, and Le Compte, Van Leuven and De Meyere judgment of 23 June 1981, Series A no. 43, p. 25, para. 59).

  It follows that the Court cannot but presume his personal impartiality (see the Le Compte, Van Leuven and De Meyere v. Belgium judgment of 23 June 1981, Series A no. 43, p. 25, para. 58).

.;   Le Compte, Van Leuven and De Meyere judgment of 23 June 1981, series A no. 43, p. 220 et seq., paras. 44 et seq.).