It also awarded an overall sum of GBP 5,000 for legal costs and expenses.   1.

    At hearings held on 4 March and 15 April 2013 N.J. was present, but the applicant was absent.

He is a former employee of the Belgorod Customs Office, where he worked as Deputy Head of the Investigations Department.

AU NOM DU PEUPLE FRANCAIS LA COUR DE CASSATION, CHAMBRE COMMERCIALE, FINANCIERE ET ECONOMIQUE, a rendu l'arrêt suivant : Sur le pourvoi formé par la société Heli-Inter assistance, société à responsabilité

In 1990, during the summer holidays, the children went to stay with her former husband; he held dual French and Romanian nationality and lived in the United States.

société Lancry protection sécurité, société par actions simplifiée unipersonnelle, dont le siège est [...], contre le jugement rendu le 29 février 2016 par le conseil de prud'hommes d'Avesnes-sur-Helpe

suivant : Statuant sur le pourvoi formé par la société Lancry protection sécurité, dont le siège est [...], contre le jugement rendu le 29 février 2016 par le conseil de prud'hommes d'Avesnes sur Helpe

[N] [P] par suite de la réception de sa renonciation à la succession de sa grand-mère ; Constater le désistement d’instance à l’égard de M.

According to certificate dated 18 December 2006 and issued by the acting head of remand prison IZ-20/1 in Grozny, in the time span between 29   May and 1 December 2006 the applicant was held in the

Still on the same date the President of the Regional Court forwarded a letter to the head of the temporary detention facility in which the applicant was held.

Accordingly, the Court held that there had been a violation of Article 8 under that head.

The Court therefore held, unanimously, that there had been a violation of Article 2 in respect of Mehdi Akdeniz.

In a judgment of 10 November 2009, the Court held that there had been a violation of Article 1 of Protocol No.

Mr Helmers submitted these on 16 April and they were forwarded to the accused the same day, together with a note similar to the one sent to Mr Helmers.

The Court therefore held unanimously that there had been no violation of Article 5.

It held, lastly, that the failure to remove the wanted notice had not infringed his personal rights. 10.

There they handcuffed him to a chair and ill-treated him overnight, beating him on the back and head and pressing bare electric wires against his ears to make him confess to the theft of the sub-machine

The Court therefore held unanimously that there had been a violation of Article 6 § 1.

, that there had been no violation of that article under that head.