Here are only several episodes: Woman’s voice [the applicant]: “Eduard Nikolaevich, it’s me, Sheleg...

  Complaint   The applicants complain, under Article 6 § 1 of the European Convention on Human Rights, that they have been denied a fair and public hearing by an independent and impartial tribunal

It would be inconsistent with the Grand Chamber’s finding in Vinter that it was for the State to decide the precise form of review.

s8EFC8F8 { width:32.36pt; display:inline-block } .sFBBFC6C9 { width:290.51pt; display:inline-block } FOURTH SECTION   DECISION   AS TO THE ADMISSIBILITY OF   Application no. 41197/98 by Edward

  He complains therefore that he has been denied a fair hearing as required by Article 6 of the Convention in respect of this offence.

Access to the case-file may, apart from exceptions for a limited duration not relevant in the present case, not be denied to the suspect and his counsel.

[K] dont le siège social est sis 20 route d’Arrentière 10200 BAR SUR AUBE représentée par Maître Edouard POIROT-BOURDAIN de la SELARL POIROT-BOURDAIN AVOCAT, avocats au barreau de ROUEN, avocat plaidant

They further complain that they were denied a fair trial in breach of Article 6 of the Convention.

width:154.72pt; display:inline-block } .s7602FED2 { width:18.21pt; display:inline-block } .sC1AC44A4 { width:228.11pt; display:inline-block }   THIRD SECTION DECISION Application no. 10762/04 Eduard

    Decides to join the applications;   2.

On this basis, on 22/02/2024 the administration denied the lawyer access to the requested information and documents.

They finally complain under this head that they were denied legal assistance during their time in police custody. 2.

Devillers à Péronne (80200) ; Mme CY... W... domiciliée 32 rue FG... Devillers à Péronne (80200) ; Parcelle cadastrée section ZD 27, situé Le Champ Poirier, appartenant à : Mme D...

Before both the public prosecutor and the investigating judge, the applicant denied the statement he had made to the police, arguing that it had been extracted from him under duress.

Before both the public prosecutor and the investigating judge, the applicant denied the statement he had made to the police, arguing that it had been extracted from him under duress.

The Article 5 complaint could be rejected for the same reason this Court disposed of Mr Edwards’ similar complaint in Harkins and Edwards (namely that, if convicted and sentenced to life imprisonment without

    Principal facts   Eduards Kornakovs and Oļegs Moisejevs are former nationals of the former Union of Soviet Socialist Republics and “permanently resident non-citizens” of Latvia who were

The Court also does not lose sight of the fact that during the criminal proceedings before the Russian courts the applicants either denied the facts imputed to them and/or contested the legal classification

He also complained that he had been denied effective access to an amparo appeal to the Constitutional Court because of the shortcomings of the legal assistance provided to him.