judgments of the European Court of Human Rights in the case of B. against the United Kingdom delivered on 8 July 1987 and 9 June 1988 and transmitted the same days to the Committee of Ministers;   Recalling

judgments of the European Court of Human Rights in the case of R. against the United Kingdom delivered on 8 July 1987 and 9 June 1988 and transmitted the same days to the Committee of Ministers;   Recalling

the case of Yuriy Nikolayevich Ivanov against Ukraine and 418 cases in the Zhovner group transmitted to the Committee for supervision of their execution under Article 46 of the Convention;   Recalling

judgments of the European Court of Human Rights in the case of W. against the United Kingdom delivered on 8 July 1987 and 9 June 1988 and transmitted the same days to the Committee of Ministers;   Recalling

#André Reichling contra Institut national d'assurance maladie-invalidité.#Petición de decisión prejudicial: Tribunal du travail de Neufchâteau - Bélgica.

European Court of Human Rights in the Nunes Violante case delivered on 8 June 1999 and transmitted to the Committee of Ministers once it had become final under Articles 44 and 46 of the Convention; Recalling

. # André Reichling contra Institut national d'assurance maladie-invalidité. # Pedido de decisão prejudicial: Tribunal du travail de Neufchâteau - Bélgica. # Segurança social - Pensão de invalidez - Artigo

Court of Human Rights (hereinafter “the Convention” and “the Court”);   Having regard to the judgment in this case, transmitted by the Court to the Committee once it had become final;   Recalling

) of 22   December 2009 in the case of Sejdić and Finci against Bosnia and Herzegovina transmitted to the Committee for supervision of its execution under Article 46 of the Convention;   Recalling

The average time needed for reaching a decision on the merits before this Court in 2003 and 2004 was about 22 months, in 2005 about 21 months, in 2006 about 20 months, in 2007 about 19 months, in 2008

of the European Court of Human Rights (hereinafter “the Convention” and “the Court”);   Having regard to the judgment transmitted by the Court to the Committee once it had become final;   Recalling

The Court disagreed with that conclusion of the domestic courts, recalling its broad and liberal interpretation of “value judgments” in relation to journalistic freedom on matters of public interest, particularly

and Fundamental Freedoms, which provides that the Committee supervises the execution of final judgments of the European Court of Human Rights (hereinafter “the Convention” and “the Court”);   Recalling

of the European Court of Human Rights (hereinafter “the Convention” and “the Court”);   Having regard to the judgment transmitted by the Court to the Committee once it had become final;   Recalling

Convention"),   Having regard to the judgment of the European Court of Human Rights in the Clerc case, delivered on 26 April 1990 and transmitted the same day to the Committee of Ministers;   Recalling

Court”) in the case of Cyprus against Turkey (application No. 25781/94) delivered on 10 May 2001 and transmitted the same day to the Committee of Ministers under Article 46 of the Convention;   Recalling

convention"),   Having regard to the judgment of the European Court of Human Rights in the Vallon case, delivered on 3 June 1985 and transmitted the same day to the Committee of Ministers;   Recalling

Convention"),   Having regard to the judgment of the European Court of Human Rights in the Djeroud case, delivered on 23 January 1991 and transmitted the same day to the Committee of Ministers;   Recalling