and “the main evidence” in establishing Mr   Momin’s guilt.

He stated that he admitted his guilt for having assaulted the two police officers in a non-life and health ‑ threatening way. 23.

  Later, on an unspecified date, the applicant confessed his guilt.   The investigation was completed by the beginning of September 1995.   19.

argued that the annulment of the contract and forfeiture of his guarantee solely on the basis that he had been charged with a criminal offence and in the absence of a final judgment establishing his guilt

xa0;                 - held, unanimously, that the respondent State was to pay to the applicant company, within three months, Netherland Guilders

In its decision of 8 April 1999, the Hague Regional Court ordered the State Secretary to determine the applicant’s objection within six weeks, imposing a default fine of 250 Netherlands guilders for each

There he was convicted of two counts of murder and aggravated robbery and sentenced to life imprisonment, after the trial court had ruled that his “guilt was of particular gravity”.

This failure to address the allegations of entrapment, which in the applicants’ cases were inseparable from the determination of their guilt, had compromised the outcome of the trials beyond repair, and

or international law at the time when it was committed";   Whereas, however, the subject of the disciplinary proceedings opened against the applicant was not the determination of the applicant's guilt

MAAF ASSURANCES Ayant son siège [Adresse 3] [Adresse 3] prise en la personne de ses représentants légaux domiciliés en cette qualité audit siège Représentant : Maître Alexandre OPSOMER de la SCP GUEILHERS

In establishing the applicants’ guilt, it had been necessary to find that, without a valid reason, they had failed to comply with the judgments ordering them to repay their debts to their creditors.

In his proposal, the Prosecutor mentioned that: “...The aforementioned serious indications of guilt, in combination with the specific characteristics of the felony committed and of which he is accused,

-L., Swiss nationals, and that the Commission declared admissible the complaint under Article 6, paragraph 2, that irrespective of any personal guilt, they had been as heirs convicted of an offence allegedly

At trial, she denied her guilt and asserted that, contrary to what the witness Mr E. had stated at the hearing, the money she had received (35,000 euros) from the latter on 26 April 2010 was not a payment

He objected to V.M.’s release on parole referring to V.M. having categorically denied his guilt, severity of the crime, the fact that by then V.M. had served only minor part – four years and two months

the Convention, that the evidence obtained as a result of the allegedly unlawful interception of his telephone communications with co-defendants had then been used by the trial court to establish his guilt

not excluded the oral testimony entirely, it had nevertheless taken a clear position on the reliability of that evidence, and thus on its evidential value in the overall assessment of the applicant’s guilt

For loss of trust, it was sufficient that actions having features of a crime had been committed, and it was not necessary to prove the applicant’s guilt.

The court held that, in so far as the applicant's guilt was concerned, it was bound by the findings of fact as established by the first-instance court and that it was prevented by the law from making a