However, the applicants had argued that their grievances had not been a result of the legislation, as such, but of the manner in which it had been implemented in practice.

Breach of those terms had been an imprisonable offence for   which the applicant had been incarcerated twice. Second, the curfew had lasted for a total of about 13 months.

of force had become “absolutely necessary”.

Accordingly, the dissolution of the applicant association had not had a clear and foreseeable legal basis.

[The applicant] had been brought into the cell at night. He had had bruises on his face. [Vlad.] further submitted that ... [the applicant] had been taken for questioning during the night.

Although the applicants had alleged that one of the tapes had been falsified, the judgment had not been based on that particular tape.

According to him, in February 2010 he had seen her in a car with a man, had had an altercation with her, and had taken her to her mother, in the village of Ishcherskaya.

The court also held that the initial contact between V.Š. and the applicant had been arranged by L.D., that V.Š. had not known the applicant beforehand and had not had any motive to incite him to commit

The applicant and F. testified that it had been “Vlad” who had introduced the applicant to F. and that they had been taking drugs together, but only F. had known how to prepare them.

When one young woman (N.) had looked away, he had hit the back of her head, as a result of which her forehead had struck the wall.

There had been several attendees, one of whom, F.A., had told A.Y. about the workshop.

In addition, two cars that had been parked in the courtyard had been damaged and their radios had been missing.

Their horses had died and they had both fallen to the ground. He stated that it had been dark but there had been moonlight.

On the contrary, according to his assessment in July   2007, the applicant had behaved calmly, had not objected to his treatment, had not caused any conflicts with other patients and had only displayed

None of those who died had been armed, or had attempted to escape or offered resistance.

The domestic courts had acknowledged that that duration had been excessive.

Moreover, he could not move to Tanzania as he had married in Sweden and had a child born there who had no ties to Tanzania. He asserted that he had provided for his daughter and paid her school fees.

applicants’ allegation that he had dissented.

Insofar as it had relied on the fact that Mr Etute’s re-incarceration had depended on a new decision – the revocation of the conditional release – that had also been true of the applicant in Brown.