paragraph 151 of the judgment of the European Court of Human Rights in Osman v. the United Kingdom (judgment of 28 October 1998, Reports of Judgments and Decisions 1998-VIII) to conclude that claims for blanket

With the exception of one detention facility where conditions were better, the conditions were as follows: detainees slept on mattresses on sleeping platforms on the floor; hygiene was poor and blankets

The applicant alleges that his cell was cold; that he was not allowed to have blankets or warm clothes and thus had to sleep on a bare iron bed, that the sewage was often blocked and that his access to

In such circumstances, the applicant cannot be blamed for not setting out detailed arguments in his appeal lodged on 31 December 2004, and for doing so only following the expiry of the statutory time-limit

On the international level, the UN Human Rights Committee deplored the blanket nature of similar restrictions, expressing the opinion that the curtailing of an individual's right to leave the country merely

Likewise, in the two cases referred to above, which concerned prisoners whose detention posed particular problems for the national authorities, there was no blanket prohibition on open-air exercise (see

The cells were only equipped with one bed and another mattress, placed on the floor (and a blanket for each inmate), and an unpartitioned floor toilet.

The Court had further found that clear risks of abuse existed, notwithstanding the arguments as to the possibility of safeguards and protective procedures; and that even a blanket ban on assisted suicide

  Ms Ree, who was standing on the beach, had a portable radio set, but did not have first-aid equipment, such as a stretcher, blankets or the like."   13.

Other random objects – food remains, empty plastic bottles, rubbish and a torn blanket – are piled up in a corner.

Government’s argument concerning the referral of the case for additional investigation at the applicant’s request, the Court recalls its consistent approach to the effect that an applicant should not be blamed

The Court reiterates, however, the principle according to which an applicant cannot be blamed for taking full advantage of the resources afforded to the defence by national law (see Yağcı and Sargın v.

Although a party to civil proceedings cannot be blamed for using the avenues available to him under domestic law in order to protect his interests, he must bear the consequences when it leads to delays

In the Court's view, in the absence of clear instructions as to the enforcement procedure to be followed, the applicant cannot be blamed for the delay in submitting the writ of execution to the competent

In addition, an applicant cannot be blamed for taking full advantage of the resources afforded by national law in the defence of her interests (see Stojanov   v. the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia

It has been the Court’s constant approach that an applicant cannot be blamed for taking full advantage of the resources afforded by the national law in the defence of his interests (see, mutatis mutandis

not been responsible for any delay in the proceedings, the Government further submitted that there did not seem to have been any long periods of inactivity for which the Swedish authorities should be blamed

At the same time, it reiterates that an applicant cannot be blamed for taking full advantage of the resources afforded by the national law in defence of his interests (see, mutatis mutandis , Yağcı and

However, they cannot be blamed for refusing property situated elsewhere (see Mihaylov v.