The running of the statutory 40-year period had been interrupted in April 1941 and had only started to run again after 8   October 1991.

On 20 April 2012 the Court invited the Government to inform it, by 27   April 2012, what steps had been taken by them to comply with the terms of the interim measure.

That judgment became final on 8 April 2003. COMPLAINTS   1.

    Ten months later on 5 April 2019 the Registry sent a registered letter, received by Mr Khamroyev on 19 April 2019, reminding him that no application form had reached the Court and setting

2000 (final on 27 July 2000) in the case of L. against Finland   (Adopted by the Committee of Ministers on 24 April 2003 at the 834th meeting of the Ministers’ Deputies)     The Committee

A hearing scheduled for 9 April 1997 was adjourned until 4 February 1998 because of the legitimate impediment of one of the accused.

    PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE COMMISSION   The application was introduced on 5 April 1991 and registered on 19 April 1991.

    On 2 April 2002 the applicant sued the Arkhangelsk Regional bailiffs' office and the Ministry of Justice for compensation for damage caused by non-enforcement of the judgment of 5 April 2001

LA COUR DE CASSATION, CHAMBRE COMMERCIALE, a rendu l'arrêt suivant : Statuant tant sur le pourvoi principal formé par la société CGIA que sur le pourvoi incident relevé par la société April solutions

On 26 April 2004 the applicant was placed in detention with a view to his deportation to the Puntland region of Somalia, via Nairobi (Kenya) and Mogadishu, scheduled to take place on 30 April 2004.

On 26 April 2007 the applicant was informed about the opening of the criminal case against him. On 27   April   2007 the court released the applicant on bail. B.

Russia (no. 6704/03), judgment of 2 April 2009. Dzhabayeva v. Russia (no. 13310/04), judgment of 2 April 2009. Dzhabrailova v. Russia (no. 1586/05), judgment of 9 April 2009.

during the search carried out on 21 April 2017.

12pt; text-align:center } .s68C46B95 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center } .s3F59B822 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; text-transform:uppercase }   Communicated on 19 April

Sklep predsednika drugega senata Sodišča z dne 5. aprila 1976.#United Brands Company in United Brands Continentaal BV proti Komisiji Evropskih skupnosti.#Zadeva 27-76 R.

Warner főtanácsnok indítványa, az ismertetés napja: 1977. április 27. # Pretore di Cento kontra X. # Előzetes döntéshozatal iránti kérelem: Pretura di Cento - Olaszország. # 110-76. sz. ügy

A Törvényszék ítélete (hatodik tanács), 2009. április 29.#BORCO-Marken-Import Matthiesen GmbH & Co. KG kontra az Európai Unió Szellemi Tulajdoni Hivatala.#T-23/07. sz. ügy.

  Croatia , no. 51198/08, 25   April 2013; Ömer Güner v.   Turkey , no.   28338/07, 4 September 2018; and compare Dominka v.

It appears that the third applicant was returned to the first applicant in April 2019.