72051/17, §§ 34-36, 8 October 2019, as to various aspects of unlawful deprivation of liberty of organisers or participants of public assemblies; Karelin v.

Rather, it constituted a restriction upon her liberty.

Russia , no. 72051/17, §§ 34-36, 8 October 2019, concerning various aspects of unlawful deprivation of liberty of the organisers or participants of public events; and Karelin v.

Article   20.2   §   5 of CAO, administrative fine of RUB 10,000 14/10/2020, Moscow City Court rotation - event classified as assembly post facto Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty

What is at stake here is not only the “right to liberty” but also the “right to security of person”. 38.

of RUB   500 and RUB   10,000             Nizhniy Novgorod Regional Court 24/05/2017 and 15/06/2017       Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty

Russia (re Crimea) [GC], nos. 20958/14 and 38334/18, § 946, 25 June 2024 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty, including unrecorded detention and detention without a judicial order and any other

Russia , no. 72051/17, §§ 34-36, 8 October 2019, concerning various aspects of unlawful deprivation of liberty of organisers or participants of public events; and Karelin v.

[T] [C] a fait assigner la société GT SPIRIT, la société LIBERTY CARS et M.

No one shall be deprived of his liberty save in the following cases and in accordance with a procedure prescribed by law: ...

    Everyone has the right to liberty and security of person. No one shall be deprived of his liberty save in the following cases and in accordance with a procedure prescribed by law: ...

. §   1 of CAO administrative detention of 11   days St   Petersburg City Court 09/03/2021 Art. 5 (1) - unlawful deprivation of liberty: escorting to a police station for the purpose of

Par jugement en date du 11 septembre 2020, le tribunal de commerce de Libourne a : - ordonné la jonction des affaires enrôlées sous les numéros 2018002060, 2019000674, et 2019000685.

He also relies on Article 5 (right to liberty and security).   Kapar v.

, permitting States to control the liberty of aliens in an immigration context.

If so, did their deprivation of liberty fall within paragraph (f) of this provision (see: mutatis mutandis Z.A. and Others v.

Damages on the basis of a loss of liberty were therefore appropriate.

If so, did their deprivation of liberty fall within paragraph (f) of this provision (see: mutatis mutandis Z.A.   and Others v.

Le SDC RÉSIDENCE LIBERTY entend solliciter la réalisation des désordres et non-conformités dénoncés sur le fondement des articles 1642-1, 1646-1 et 1792-3 du Code civil.