sum at a rate equal to the marginal lending rate of the European Central Bank plus three percentage points from the expiry of the above-mentioned three months until settlement;   Recalling that Rule

    On 19 July 2012 the President of the Chamber indicated to the Government, under Rule 39 of the Rules of Court, that the applicant should not be extradited for the duration of the proceedings

Notice of the communication was also sent to the applicant who was requested to appoint a representative pursuant to Rule 36 §§ 2 and 4 of the Rules of Court.

On the same day the Court decided, in the interests of the parties and the proper conduct of the proceedings before it, to indicate to the Russian Government, under Rule 39 of the Rules of Court, that

sum at a rate equal to the marginal lending rate of the European Central Bank plus three percentage points from the expiry of the above-mentioned thirty days until settlement;   Recalling that Rule

settlement it was agreed that the government of Croatia would pay the applicant the total sum of 6 000 euros, within three months from the date of notification of the judgment;   Recalling that Rule

sums at a rate equal to the marginal lending rate of the European Central Bank plus three percentage points from the expiry of the above-mentioned three months until settlement;   Recalling that Rule

39 of the Rules of Court, Having regard to the observations submitted by the respondent Government, Having deliberated, decides as follows: THE FACTS The applicants, Mrs Mahindokht Najafi Khalajabadi

settlement it was agreed that the Government of Poland would pay the applicant, the global sum of 15 000 Polish zlotys, within three months as from the delivery of the judgment;   Recalling that Rule

    Were the applicant’s prosecution, trial and conviction for electoral offences permissible and compatible with the principles of rule of law and legal certainty?

Rule 39 of the Rules of Court was applied. The applicants invoke Articles 3, 8 and 13 of the Convention.

39 of the Rules of Court).

    In respect of application no. 16043/20, having regard to the measures taken in response to the Court’s decisions to indicate interim measures under Rule 39 of the Rules of Court, was there

Her present application, first introduced by a request under Rule 39 of the Rules of the Court, concerns the alleged irregular provision of medical care as regards her oncology disease, with which she

39 of the Rules of Court, Having regard to the observations submitted by the respondent Government, Having deliberated, decides as follows: THE FACTS The applicant, Ms Naghmeh Tayfeh Agha Rezalou, is

and Rutar Marketing d.o.o. against Slovenia   (Adopted by the Committee of Ministers on 14 March 2024 at the 1492 nd meeting of the Ministers’ Deputies)     Application No.

The Court considers that it cannot, on the basis of the case file, determine the admissibility of this complaint and that it is therefore necessary, in accordance with Rule 54 § 2 (b) of the Rules of Court

The Court notes that in her constitutional appeal, the applicant did not challenge the relevant statutory provision, but rather the manner in which the rule was applied in her case.

In his constitutional appeal, the applicant did not challenge the relevant statutory provision, but rather the manner in which the rule was applied in his case.

39 of the Rules of Court).