ALLEGED VIOLATION OF ARTICLE   6 § 1 OF THE CONVENTION 6.

    ALLEGED VIOLATION OF ARTICLE   6 § 1 OF THE CONVENTION 6.

ALLEGED VIOLATION OF ARTICLE 5   §   3 OF THE CONVENTION 7.     The applicant complained that his pre-trial detention had been unreasonably long.

ALLEGED VIOLATION OF ARTICLE 5   §   3 OF THE CONVENTION 6.     The applicant complained that his pre-trial detention had been unreasonably long.

THE LAW ALLEGED VIOLATION OF ARTICLE 5   §   3 OF THE CONVENTION 5.     The applicant complained principally that his pre-trial detention had been unreasonably long.

THE LAW ALLEGED VIOLATION OF ARTICLE 5   §   3 OF THE CONVENTION 5.     The applicant complained principally that his pre-trial detention had been unreasonably long.

The applicant further complained under Article 6 § 3 (c) and (d) about the alleged unfairness of the proceedings.

”) and the ConEC protocol; and (v)     changes were made to a number of PEC protocols at a later date.

Protocols of ConECs and PECs were not examined or reviewed at CEC sessions.

Slovakia, The European Court of Human Rights (First Section), sitting as a Committee composed of:   Péter Paczolay , President ,   Gilberto Felici,   Raffaele Sabato , judges , and Viktoriya

Alleged violation of Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 to the Convention 15.

-Τ. for damages in respect of the same alleged offences.

THE COURT’S ASSESSMENT ALLEGED VIOLATION OF ARTICLE 6   §   1 OF THE CONVENTION 4.

The applicant, who was a detainee at the time of the events, was initially granted 14 hours per week of computer access by the criminal trial court’s decision of 11 May 2018 with a view to preparing his

” (EUR 16,000 per victim); (d)     32,488 alleged victims of the administrative practice contrary to Article 2 of Protocol No. 4, preventing the return of ethnic Georgians to their homes in Abkhazia

As regards the applicant’s grievances under Article   8 of the Convention, the Court reiterates that, in order to claim to be the victim of the alleged violation, the applicant should demonstrate

Application no. 72453/11 Vladimir Viktorovich ZOLOTAREV against Russia   The European Court of Human Rights (Third Section), sitting on 20   January 2022 as a Committee composed of:   Peeter

It was therefore not capable of remedying the alleged violation.

    The present application concerns the alleged violation of the principle of ne bis in idem . The applicant is a cooperative that produces olive oil from olives supplied by its members.