Article 18 in conjunction with Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 in respect of both applicants and Article 2 of Protocol No. 4 in respect of the applicant: (a) Applicability – Both the right to protection of

Both sets of proceedings Referring to both sets of proceedings, the applicant complains under Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 that his property rights were violated in so far as his pension is concerned.

In reaching his conclusions, the judge had given due consideration both to the clear presumption that life should be preserved and to the wishes of the applicant, who had been represented throughout by

France of 21/10/2003, for both pending and completed proceedings).

According to Article 1684 as amended, a child is entitled to have access to both parents: each parent is obliged to have contact with, and entitled to have access to, the child.

of the applicant, an Italian Masonic association, as its members were discriminated against when applying for public posts in the Marche and Friuli Venezia Giulia regions (violation of Article 11 in both

In both applications, he relied on Article 6 § 1 (access to court and fair hearing). In application no. 81651/17, he also invoked Articles 8 and 13 of the Convention. THE COURT’S ASSESSMENT 7.

THE LAW The applicant complained about the overall length of the two different civil proceedings before the Court of Ponte da Barca, considering both of them excessive.

On 12 March and 4 June 2019 the authority for the protection of minors ( комиссия по делам несовершеннолетних ) found the applicant guilty on both charges and gave her a warning.

On 11 May 2001 the District Court granted custody of the child to her grandparents and ordered both parents to contribute to the child’s maintenance. On 25 June 2001 the applicant appealed.

The following afternoon, both applicants were taken to police premises. According to the domestic authorities: i.

The applicant’s claim that the building authority should have applied a newly adopted land use plan was dismissed by both instances.

Meanwhile, both countries started instituting minor-offence proceedings against each other’s nationals (fishermen) in relation to their activities in the disputed maritime area.

Russia , §§   38-40, both cited above). 14.

A..., représentée par Me Bohner, demande au tribunal : 1°) d’annuler l’arrêté du 7 février 2025 par lequel le préfet du Bas-Rhin a refusé de lui délivrer un titre de séjour, lui a fait obligation de

F, - et les observations de Me Bohner, représentant Mme D. Considérant ce qui suit : 1.

H C, représenté par Me Bohner, demande au tribunal : 1°) de l'admettre provisoirement au bénéfice de l'aide juridictionnelle ; 2°) d'annuler l'arrêté du 16 mai 2023, par lequel le préfet du Haut-Rhin

B E D, représenté par Me Bohner, demande au tribunal : 1°) d'annuler l'arrêté du 6 février 2023, par lequel la préfète du Bas-Rhin a refusé de lui délivrer un titre de séjour, l'a obligé à quitter le