The applicant was arrested on 18 August 1975, under an    arrest warrant dated 14 August 1975, issued by the Rome    investigating judge, on charges of fraud, forgery

In connection with the forgery and use of forged documents he held that the reports drafted by the defendants reflected the reality.

The remainder of the judgment (in respect of document forgery) took effect. 28.

In January 1996 he was placed under investigation for misuse of official authority and forgery and was suspended from his post with suspension of salary.

The applicant was found guilty of offences including incitement to forgery and making use of forged documents, and was given a suspended sentence of one year and four months’ imprisonment.

The case concerns the applicant’s complaint that prison authorities interfered with her correspondence with her lawyers during her detention on remand on charges of theft and forgery.

;   Section 30/B of the Military Criminal Code states that those who are convicted of shameful offences such as simple embezzlement, aggravated embezzlement, dishonesty, bribery, theft, fraud, forgery

       On 17 January 1992 the Public Prosecutor of Athens charged the applicant with forgery and terroristic acts. The applicant appointed Mrs.

Article   7 of the Convention on Cybercrime reads as follows: Article 7 –   Computer-related forgery “Each Party shall adopt such legislative and other measures as may be necessary to establish

personne de son représentant légal [Adresse 13] [Adresse 13] [Localité 4] représentée par Me Anne MURGIER de la SELARL CAPSTAN LMS, avocat au barreau de PARIS substituée par Maître Amandine FOUGEROL

xa0; Splitting-up of criminal cases On 9 December 2000 the applicant was additionally charged with offences under Articles 188 § 3 (smuggling), 191 § 2 (unlawful trade in precious stones), and 327 (forgery

The reply referred to the conduct of the proceedings in the applicant's case and the fact that M.C. was being prosecuted on charges of forgery of documents and use of false identity.

The court noted that the applicant was charged with aggravated fraud, corruption and forgery of documents.

“MRT”) on suspicion of “vehicle smuggling” (the criminal proceedings being ultimately discontinued in this respect), illegal purchase, selling or carrying of a weapon, burglary, abuse of powers and forgery

    On 22 March 2010 the DNA instituted criminal proceedings against the applicant for abuse of office, being an accessory to tax evasion and forgery of documents.

On 19 December 1996 the Court of Appeal prolonged the applicant’s detention until 24 February 1997, having regard to new circumstances of the case which would justify bringing charges of forgery against

    The Government raised a preliminary objection concerning the failure to exhaust available domestic remedies, arguing that the examination of the applicant’s complaint about forgery of official

The public prosecutor also brought charges of forgery and misfeasance in public office against the ARPAC officers who had authorised the operation of the plant by means of the 2012 AIA. 66.

On   8   January 2003 the Regional Office of the Judicial Police in Nitra accused her of forgery and attempted fraud.

director was also convicted of environmental disaster under Article 434 of the Criminal Code, while the proceedings in relation to the other charges brought against him (unauthorised waste management, forgery