According to the Government the hearing scheduled for 12 May 1998 was adjourned because the applicant’s counsel had not received the notice of the hearing date.

hearing would be sufficient.

    Rule: No trial hearing in the defendant’s absence 23.

The investigating judge decided to appoint a defence counsel to represent the applicant during the hearing, on the grounds that this was the third time that his lawyer was absent from the hearing.

According to the applicant, he and his chosen representative never received summons for this hearing.

The lawyer attended the first-instance hearings and made submissions on the applicant’s behalf, without raising any objections against the hearings being held in the applicant’s absence.

The next hearing was scheduled for 3   November 2003.

The appeal court had not pointed to any factual elements or legal arguments for justifying the hearing in camera: in that connection, the justice of the peace had held a public hearing, without any safety

It thus concluded that an oral hearing was not required under Article 6 of the Convention. 15.

However, the court did not adopt any decision and postponed the hearing until 16 April 2010. On the latter date it again postponed the hearing until 19 April 2010. 13 .

Moreover, the next hearing was fixed for 24   January   1996.     The hearing scheduled for 24 January 1996 was cancelled. The next hearing was fixed for 2 February 1996.

a complainant has requested a hearing within the time-limit.

Georgia - 39718/09 Judgment 28.3.2019 [Section V] Article 6 Criminal proceedings Article 6-1 Fair hearing Rectification of starting date of cumulative prison sentence without an oral hearing: violation

    The Court further notes that an oral, and public, hearing constitutes a fundamental principle enshrined in Article 6 §   1 (see Jussila v.

    The first-instance court had held several hearings, including on 1   and 6 July 2010, when it heard statements from various witnesses, and admitted several items as evidence.

6-1 - Fair hearing) (Article 6 - Right to a fair trial;Article 6-3-d - Examination of witnesses)

    Article 358 lists the issues that the appellate court may examine at its preparatory hearing (that is, a hearing that might be required in order to deal with all the procedural issues prior

The court ordered the police to search for them and escort them to the court hearings on at least four occasions.

relied on Article 6 § 1 of the Convention, which reads as follows: Article   6   §   1 “In the determination of ... any criminal charge against him, everyone is entitled to a fair ... hearing