Before her pregnancy, she was assessed by a state medical panel, for the purposes of social insurance, as suffering from a disability of medium severity.

Before her pregnancy, she was assessed by a State medical panel, for social-insurance purposes, as suffering from a disability of medium severity. 9.

Under the provisions of Article 29 § 3 of the Convention, it was decided to examine the merits of the application at the same time as its admissibility. THE FACTS A.

B.Ch. tried to persuade her not to terminate the pregnancy and offered help with giving the baby up for adoption or placing it in an orphanage.

    The applicant, but not the Government, filed observations on the merits (Rule 59 § 1). 8.

Mere reports of discovery of unidentified bodies in the newspapers could not be sufficient to spark an investigation. 14.

ANTAL 1950   Erzsébet ANTALNÉ FÜLÖP 1948   József ANTONI 1950   Éva ARATÓNÉ KRAUSZ 1944   Pálné ÁRVAY 1948   Jánosné BAÁR 1947   Izolda BABÓCSINÉ NAGY 1945   Gyula BABÓS

Baka ,   Mr   R. Türmen ,   Mr   M. Ugrekhelidze ,   Mr   V. Zagrebelsky ,   Mrs   D. Jočienė ,   Mr   D. Popović, judges , and Mrs S.

Baka,   Mr   I. Cabral Barreto,   Mr   R. Türmen,   Mr   M. Ugrekhelidze,   Mrs   A. Mularoni,   Ms   D. Jočienė, judges, and Mrs S.

out managerial tasks and coordinated the entire activity of the DNA, a department of the prosecutor’s office attached to the High Court of Cassation and Justice specialised in the investigation of medium-to

Baka ,   Mr   L. Wildhaber ,   Mr   G. Bonello ,   Mr   P. Lorenzen ,   Mrs   M. Tsatsa-Nikolovska ,   Mr   E.

These documents, they argue, merit greater protection than, for instance, expert reports or minutes of parliamentary committees.

    The applicant company and the Government each filed observations on the merits (Rule 59 § 1). 8.

Baka,   Mr   E. Levits,   Mr   K.

It was also decided to rule on the admissibility and merits of the application at the same time (Article 29 § 1). 5.

    The applicant company and the Government each filed further observations on the merits (Rule 59 § 1). 8.

Both Tribunals found that the applicant’s grounds sought, in essence, to reargue the merits of the appeal and that no error of law had been disclosed. 45 .

    The applicant and the Government each filed observations on the merits (Rule 59 § 1).

On 24 July 1996 the two investigations were merged.