target stringlengths 11 70 | prompt stringlengths 200 10k |
|---|---|
13 February 2004 | 12. In 2002 the applicant filed a constitutional complaint concerning the length of the proceedings. On 13 February 2004 the Constitutional Court (Ustavni sud Republike Hrvatske) declared his complaint inadmissible for lack of capacity to conduct legal proceedings, establishing that the applicant had not been a party ... |
19 July 2011 | 60. The relevant parts of the reports issued by the European Committee for the Prevention of Torture and Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (the “CPT”) have been quoted elsewhere (see L.M. v. Latvia, no. 26000/02, §§ 34-36, |
thirteen years’ | 5. On 6 October 1987 the Landshut Regional Court convicted the applicant, inter alia, of two counts of rape combined with one count of sexual assault, of attempted rape and of aggravated robbery. It sentenced the applicant, who had acted with full criminal responsibility, to |
19 April 2000 | 17. On 19 April 2000 the Tymovsk District Court inquired the Novoaltaysk Town and Tymovsk District police departments about the registered place of the applicant's residence. In May 2000 the Tymovsk District police department replied that the applicant had moved to Novoaltaysk in 1997. The District police department i... |
18 June 2004 | 31. On 14 April 2004 the applicant lodged a complaint against that decision with the Lugoj District Court, alleging that the staff of the National Railway Company were responsible for the accident. By a judgment of |
the start date to mid-February 2016 | 19. From 15 December 2015 to 5 August 2016 (when the application was lodged with the Court) and then further until 22 June 2017 the applicant was kept in the Сentre for the Temporary Confinement of Foreign Nationals (Центр временного содержания иностранных граждан) in Krasnoye Selo. From |
11 September 2009 | 13. In support of her statements, the applicant submitted two statements by Sirazhudin Shafiyev’s brother, Mr Ta.Sh., one dated 9 September 2009 and another 26 March 2010; a statement by Mr R.Sh. dated |
28 November 2011 | 47. On 8 June 2011 the SIZO deputy governor and the chief of the medical unit replied that, following a planned X-ray that day, K. had been diagnosed with infiltrative tuberculosis of the right lung and had been transferred to the SIZO’s medical unit for treatment. In another letter (dated |
Eleven years | 26. By a decision of 26 August 2002 the Town Court dismissed the applicant’s request. It noted that the applicant had asked it to restore the file and had submitted copies of documents related to his employment dispute. However, those documents had not been duly certified. They had been partly typewritten and partly h... |
12 July 2011 | 22. On 15 March 2012 the Zagreb Municipal Civil Court dismissed the applicant’s request for the return of the child. The relevant part of that decision reads as follows:
“... having regard to the fact that the separation of N.A. from his mother and from a safe environment would without a doubt have harmful and traumat... |
18 December 2008 | 52. Prior to and following that date a number of decisions were taken extending his term of pre-trial detention and confirming it. In challenging these decisions, the applicant relied, inter alia, on the rule of speciality as mentioned above. In particular, on |
14 October 1997 | 20. In a coded telegram of 6 March 1998 the Chief Executive of the Lugansk Region informed the Ukrainian President that, notwithstanding his resolution of 28 January 1998 calling for the defence of national interests, the Supreme Arbitration Tribunal had set aside the judgments of 4 August and |
more than two years | 22. On 27 October 2006 the Town Court extended the applicant’s detention until 30 January 2007. The court noted as follows:
“[The court] discerns no grounds to release [the applicant]. [The applicant] is charged with extremely serious criminal offences which attract a custodial sentence of |
10 February 2001 | 44. By letter of 7 March 2002 the acting head of the Department for Supervision of Investigation at the Prosecutor General's Office (и.о. начальника Управления по надзору за расследованием преступлений органами прокуратуры при Генеральной прокуратуре РФ) informed the applicant's counsel, in reply to his complaint, tha... |
18 May 2002 | 15. On 18 September 2001 the applicant applied to the Moscow City Court for an extension of the time-limit to submit his points of appeal. Having received no response for several months, the applicant complained to the Moscow Justice Department and the Moscow Courts’ Administration Department. On |
31 July 2003 | 11. On 23 January 2003 the applicant increased her pecuniary damage claim. On 8 April 2003 an oral hearing set for 16 April 2003 was cancelled. On 3 July 2003 the Regional Court ordered a new expert report from O. since S., who had meanwhile been traced, was not available for a hearing. On |
17 October 1988 | 10. The Treasury appealed. On 20 December 1987 the Court of Cassation quashed the decision of the Şişli First Instance Court. It held that the first-instance court should have adjourned the examination of the case pending the decision of the Bakırköy Assize Court in the criminal proceedings. The applicant requested re... |
September 1973 | 17. In September 1973 other parents brought to the applicant’s parents’ attention similar allegations concerning L.H. Following a meeting of parents chaired by the manager about this, L.H. went on sick leave. In |
fifteen days | 7. On 7 May 2007 the applicant was arrested and on 10 May 2007 the Kentron and Nork-Marash District Court of Yerevan ordered the applicant’s detention for a period of two months, upon an application by the investigator, taking into account the nature and the dangerousness of the imputed offence and the fact that the a... |
four years and six months’ | 51. Having regard to the applicant’s clean criminal record, age, state of health, lengthy detention in custody, positive work references and the absence of aggravating circumstances, the court invoked the “special-circumstances” clause of Article 64 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and sentenced him to a shorter term... |
17 November 2009 | 12. The applicants’ further complaints against the measures were dismissed by the District Police Department on 22 May 2009. This decision was upheld by the Budapest Chief Police Commander, acting as a second-instance authority, on |
26 June 2007 | 10. On 3 October 2012 the Presidium of the Supreme Court of the Komi Republic quashed the judgment of 7 November 2008 and remitted the case for a fresh examination. On 18 December 2012 the Supreme Court of the Komi Republic upheld the judgment of |
25 February 1999 | 33. On 2 December 1998 the applicant asked the Regional Court to grant him retrospective leave to appeal out of time. He maintained that his counsel had withdrawn the notice of appeal without his consent. On |
22 May 2001 | 11. On 20 April 2001 the Vasylkivskyy Town Court awarded the applicant 2,000[1] Ukrainian hryvnias (UAH) in compensation for non-pecuniary damage inflicted by the unlawful decision of the court, UAH 8.68[2] in compensation for the loss of income and UAH 300[3] in compensation for costs and expenses to be paid from the... |
14 August 2000 | 15. On 3 August 2000 the Constitutional Court (Ústavní soud) dismissed her appeal, stating inter alia that there had been no unjustified delays in the proceedings. It considered that any delay in the proceedings before the Supreme Court had been caused by the amendments to the Code of Civil Procedure (občanský soudní ... |
30 August 2004 | 16. On 14 September 2004 the applicant petitioned the Gospić County Court judge responsible for the execution of sentences, complaining about the prison conditions and also alleging that a postal parcel sent to him by his parents on |
The same day | 16. At 3 p.m. on 5 February 1998 the applicant was brought before an investigator and charged with having instigated others to commit unlawful deprivation of liberty in a manner endangering the health of the victim and also to commit extortion through threats of murder accompanied by light bodily injury. The investiga... |
3 March 2010 | 6. The applicant served his prison sentence in the closed section of Ljubljana prison in the period between 3 April 2009 and 3 March 2010. From 3 to 11 April 2009 he was held in cell 123 (second floor) measuring 16.28 square metres. The cell, apart from the furniture, contained six sleeping places (three bunk beds). A... |
the first half of 2000 | 7. On 24 July 2000, as the investigation unfolded, the local official newspaper the North Star printed an interview with a deputy town prosecutor about a spike in murder rates. The prosecutor said:
“In |
the night of 24 April 1999 | 28. In February 2002 one of the soldiers mentioned during his questioning, and two other soldiers confirmed this, that D.M. had had a dispute with two sergeants, K. and V., before taking up guard duty on |
December 2002 | 29. On 11 June 2003 the Main Military Prosecutor’s Office forwarded to the UGA prosecutor’s office the first applicant’s complaint about the disappearance of Khava Magomadova who “had been abducted by federal military servicemen in |
27 April 2006 | 24. By a letter of 7 April 2006, the Supreme Court of Ukraine referred the case file materials to the Court of Appeal to bring the judgment of the Czech courts into compliance with Ukrainian law under the Convention on the Transfer of Sentenced Persons. The Court of Appeal scheduled the case for a hearing on |
25 December 2007 | 72. On 13 December 2007 the Dnipropetrovsk Regional Commercial Court (the Dnipropetrovsk Court) allowed the applicant company’s claim for restitution of precious metals against the State Enterprise “Prydniprovskyy Zavod Kolyorovykh Metaliv” (the State Enterprise). It also awarded the applicant costs and expenses. This... |
29 March 1999 | 32. On the basis of that opinion, the Paris Administrative Court ruled on the merits of the case on 2 September 2003. It began with the following observations:
“Liability
The provisions of section 1 of the Law of 4 March 2002, in the absence of provisions therein deferring their entry into force, are applicable under ... |
1 April 2004 | 19. In a decision of 30 September 2008 the Disciplinary Board of the Paris Bar Association dismissed all the charges against the applicant. It considered that his objective had been to ensure the removal from the case file of the documents which emanated from the Syrian authorities. It observed in this regard that alt... |
1 July and 28 September 2011 | 27. In the course of the above-mentioned custody proceedings (see paragraph 22 above) the court ordered a combined expert opinion from experts in psychiatry and psychology. Accordingly, the applicants and the first applicant’s father were examined by forensic experts of this type at the Neuropsychiatric Hospital in Po... |
December 2000 | 77. Mr E.S. also stated that Mr Kolev, who had engaged for a certain period in unlawful activities ordered by the Chief Public Prosecutor, had later refused to continue and had started collecting evidence about those activities. Owing to his mental disorder the Chief Public Prosecutor constantly feared plots and consi... |
27 October 2004 | 13. The applicant’s lawyer appealed, arguing that the detention was unlawful and excessively long. The lawyer also reiterated the arguments that he had put forward in his statement of appeal against the detention order of |
10 October 1994 | 11. The applicant submitted that he had not been informed about this incorporation at the time and had not had any means of challenging this measure, either immediately following the action or after |
8 and 9 August 2014 | 26. On 8 and 9 August 2014 the prosecuting authorities conducted a search of Mr Aliyev’s home and office. During the search the domestic authorities seized a large number of documents, including all the case files relating to the pending applications before the Court, which were in Mr Aliyev’s possession as a represen... |
25 October 2003 | 18. On 20 December 2004 the Korsun-Shevchenkivsky District Court convicted the applicant of hooliganism, acquitted him of theft, and sentenced him to six and a half years’ imprisonment. The court found, in particular, that on |
26 March 2001 | 21. On 19 March 2001 the District Court found that the applicant had been apprised of the hearing date but chose not to attend it. Having heard the respondent, the District Court rejected the applicant’s claims. On |
11 November 1997 | 4. On 17 October 2001 the applicant was discharged from his civil service post following his previous criminal conviction by a martial law court. The conviction had been finalised by the Military Court of Cassation's decision of |
November 2004 | 10. Pursuant to the above-mentioned Law of 5 July 2000, and after the annulment of the first travellers’ reception and accommodation programme by the administrative courts, a new programme was adopted in |
of 27 July 2004 | 6. The Government contested the applicant’s account of the events surrounding her arrest on 27 July 2004. In doing so they relied on statements provided by AC, the applicant’s brother-in-law, another police officer (“R”), and a civilian who was present at the police station when the applicant arrived. The Government s... |
7 June 2006 | 22. On 7 June 2006 the District Court extended the defendants' pre-trial detention until 12 October 2006. The court reiterated verbatim the reasoning of the previous detention orders. On 4 July 2006 the Regional Court upheld the decision of |
16 May 2003 | 15. After receiving the file from the Supreme Court, the Arkhangelsk Regional Court ordered that the case be returned to the Arkhangelsk Regional Prosecutor for an additional investigation. That decision was upheld on appeal by the Supreme Court. On |
9 July 2002 | 34. On 15 July 2002 the applicant submitted a further request for release. He was told, on 18 July 2002, that the High Court would not deal with it, as it had been introduced less than fourteen days after the dismissal of his previous request for release had become final, namely on |
22 December 2003 | 74. On 15 April 2004 the court held the final hearing to review the final distribution list. The applicant bank lodged an objection (prigovor) to the list, stating that unjust enrichment of the bankruptcy estate had occurred in the amount seized from it in the enforcement proceedings on |
21 November 1994 | 8. On 4 October 1995, after having held an oral hearing, the Vorarlberg Independent Administrative Panel (Unabhängiger Verwaltungssenat) upheld both penal orders but reduced the prison sentence of the one dated |
the last five years | 105. On 14 November 2005 the Ministry dismissed his application for Slovenian citizenship because he had failed to prove that he had actually resided in Slovenia for ten years and had lived there uninterruptedly for |
28 May 2010 | 25. On 21 May 2010 the Main Contractor signed an agreement for the provision of security guard services with private security company P-4 (приватне підприємство «Охоронне агентство «Р-4»). (hereinafter “PS”). The subject of the agreement was the provision of security guard services for the purpose of preventing third ... |
twenty-five days | 29. In a report dated 3 April 1998, the Director of the Law and Order Department of the Diyarbakır Security Directorate informed the Chief Public Prosecutor’s Office of the outcome of the investigation into the allegations made by the applicant and her mother. He concluded that the applicant had left her husband and g... |
31 January 1996 | 37. The applicant appealed and requested a stay of execution of the Board’s decision. He challenged, inter alia, an alleged failure to provide the Board members with his submissions for its meeting on |
6 November 2009 | 17. Following the confrontation, the applicant complained about the way it had been conducted. He complained, inter alia, that the investigator had failed to record a number of important statements proving his innocence and that he had put several questions to M.S. which were neither recorded nor answered. In this con... |
5 November 2009 | 18. On 20 October 2008 the applicant pleaded guilty to the offence of indecent assault of E. On 9 February 2009 he was sentenced to 3 years’ imprisonment. He appealed against sentence arguing that that sentence amounted to a consecutive sentence whereas concurrent sentences were the practice where offences were commit... |
29 August 2011 | 20. On 4 June 2011 an investigation was begun under Article 333 § 1 of the Criminal Code into the offence of exceeding official authority. The applicant repeatedly asked to be questioned in that regard, but his requests were ignored by the authorities. On |
more than 7 days | 14. Lord Bingham found that Article 3 was not breached by the policy. He held as follows:
“29...Despite much learned argument addressed to the House, I do not find it necessary to discuss the extent or probability of the risk or the extent to which it must be foreseen. For I agree with [the High Court] that the policy... |
three years | 37. On 23 March 2011 the Kaunas Regional Administrative Court dismissed the applicant’s claim. The court established that the applicant had been injured on 25 May 2003, and the statutory time-limit to lodge a claim for damages caused by health impairment was |
5 September 2003 | 9. The applicants sought leave to apply for judicial review of the Secretary of State’s decision. On 29 July 2003 the High Court refused leave on the papers. The applicants renewed their application and on |
the period from 1973 to 1978 | 25. On 23 February 1999 the applicant appeared before a judge of the Ankara National Security Court, who ordered that he should be detained pending trial. The applicant did not apply to the National Security Court to have that decision set aside. Before the judge he repeated the statement he had made to the prosecutor... |
28 July 2005 | 30. On 19 May 2005 the District Court held a hearing at which the applicant was neither present nor represented. By a judgment of 19 May 2005, the District Court rejected his claims. The applicant appealed. The defendants submitted their observations in reply. On |
latach 1944-1990 | 6. On 11 April 1997 the parliament passed the Law on disclosing work for or service in the State’s security services or collaboration with them between 1944 and 1990 by persons exercising public functions (ustawa o ujawnieniu pracy lub służby w organach bezpieczeństwa państwa lub współpracy z nimi w |
15 September 2015 | 19. The third applicant, Ms X., gave birth to a daughter on 11 June 2011 and to a son on 15 March 2013. On 1 September 2015 Ms X. was granted a Netherlands residence permit for the purpose of remaining with her partner. On |
28 February 2003 | 43. On 19 February 2003 the MADEKKI informed the applicant that it had advised the Prisons Administration to ensure further medical examinations were carried out and to arrange for him to have a consultation with a neurosurgeon. It appears that a CT scan of the applicant’s head was carried out on |
19 April 2001 | 19. The resolution provides in particular:
“ ... before the relevant legislation of Ukraine is enacted, the legislation of the USSR is applicable within the territory of the republic in respect of issues that have not been regulated by the legislation of Ukraine and in so far as they do not contravene the Constitution... |
10 October 2003 | 29. On 3 December 2003 the investigators questioned Mr I. He confirmed that he had learnt about the detention of Mr Suliman Isayev and Mr Ramzan Isayev in the police station from a police officer. When he had visited it on |
13 April 2004 | 37. The municipality appealed to the Supreme Court of Cassation, arguing that the action was inadmissible and unfounded.
The Supreme Court of Cassation declared the appeal inadmissible by a decision of |
9 September 2001 | 51. They further asserted that everybody knew how the village had been evacuated but that they had preferred to remain silent for their own sake.
(f) Letter from the Gendarmerie Command in Lice distributed to the village mayors’ office in Lice, dated |
March-April 2000 | 20. Finally, the applicant stated that, following his transfer back to the same facility on 9 December 1999, the detention conditions had not materially improved. He was not provided with proper bedding, towels or kitchenware. There was no treatment available for his skin disease due to a lack of proper medication. Hi... |
the first six months | 44. On 10 February 2015 the Pushkinskiy District Court of St Petersburg established, on the basis of the relevant reports and expert examinations, that M. still had a positive image of the first applicant and had expressed a wish to have contact with her, and that it was therefore possible to establish a contact sched... |
7 July 2000 | 50. A decision of 10 December 2001 of the first deputy prosecutor of Grozny ordered that the investigation in criminal case no. 12005 be resumed. It stated, in particular, that “...the investigation ... [had been] extremely superficial and was limited to carrying out several investigative actions and to including in t... |
17 February 2000 | 12. During the retrial, on 15 November 1999 the applicant informed the Court of Appeal that it had made a request before the Supreme Court of Justice to have the case transferred to another court, the hearing being fixed for |
2 March 2001 | 57. On the same day the Town Court dismissed all of the applicants’ claims. On the defamation issue it found that the article “The Land of Slaves” had been based on the true facts which had subsequently been established in the criminal judgment of |
7 July 2010 | 34. In October 2009 the applicant company sought discovery of documents on a voluntary basis. It then applied to the Master of the High Court, on 14 December 2009, for an order of discovery, pursuing the matter before him in April, May and July 2010. The Master gave his ruling on |
the following day | 38. On 31 July 2002 the applicant was transferred into cell no. 6, located in the basement. According to the applicant, it measured 12 sq. m and housed twelve inmates. On 6 August 2002 the entire basement, including cell no. 6, was flooded from the sewage system. On |
30 November 2012 | 33. On 3 September 2012 Mr M.G. of the Derbent investigative committee refused to open a criminal case. The refusal decision was quashed by his immediate superior on 19 September 2012. On 6 October 2012 Mr M.G. delivered a new refusal to investigate. It was quashed by the deputy head of the Derbent investigative commi... |
Monday, 9 February 2004 | 14. On 10 February 2004, during her questioning by the investigator, the applicant changed her account of the events as follows. On 7 February 2004, when she had been about to leave work at 1 p.m., M. had entered the office. She had brought some documents in order to get a passport for her son. The applicant had infor... |
two and a half years | 29. The applicant maintained that: (a) the Government’s Privatisation Council (Savjet za privatizaciju) had sold several plots of the debtor’s land to a private company X and the Municipality of Podgorica for EUR 7,618,000 and EUR 1,400,000, respectively; (b) the debtor had received a grant of EUR 1,200,000 from the G... |
2 June 2000 | 14. On 20 April 2000 the Investigation Board of the Ministry of the Interior issued a non-prosecution decision in respect of the Under-Secretary of State. The Investigation Board maintained in its decision that the search warrant issued by the Ankara State Security Court and the instruction of the Public Prosecutor ne... |
17 November 2009 | 19. The Minor Offences Court issued a minor-offences order finding M.Š. guilty under section 6 of the Minor Offences Against Public Order and Peace Act (Zakon o prekršajima protiv javnog reda i mira), and fined him 1,170 Croatian kunas (HRK). The other defendants were found guilty under Article 13 of the same Act and ... |
24 October 1994 | 10. On 24 October 1994 the Gdańsk Regional Prosecutor dismissed the applicant’s lawyer’s appeal of 19 October 1994 against the detention decision, considering that a number of witnesses had given evidence incriminating all the suspects. On |
30 November 2005 | 49. Although upon his arrival the applicant was assigned to a non-working group, there were subsequently several attempts to include him in working activities. For a month, starting on 28 October 2005, the applicant worked in a storehouse. Since his work there was found to be unsatisfactory, on |
23 January 2004 | 15. In late 2003 the applicant complained about the operation to the Ministry of Health. The Ministry ordered the Plovdiv Regional Health Inspectorate to carry out an inquiry and, based on its findings, on |
the end of the month | 20. In February 2001, the applicant's leading counsel advised that the case involved “complicated and novel arguments” and applied for an extension of legal aid to junior counsel. This was granted. In March 2001, counsel lodged the applicant's skeleton argument and at |
from 28 December 2007 to 10 January 2008 | 14. The first applicant was detained in the SIZO from 2 to 28 December 2007, then subsequently from 10 January to 10 February 2008, and from 18 February to 2 June 2008. During the intervening periods, |
from 14 December 2005 until 19 January 2007 | 7. The present application concerns his detention in Łódź Remand Centre during the following periods of time: (1) from 1 September 2004 until 10 March 2005, (2) from 20 May until 30 November 2005, (3) |
7 March 2005 | 36. On 10 February 2005 the Supreme Court discontinued the proceedings concerning the applicant’s appeal on points of law on the ground that the applicant had not complied with the statutory requirement of compulsory legal representation. That decision became final on |
several years | 48. In a previous letter of 5 June 2008, the head prosecutor of the military prosecutor’s office at the High Court of Cassation and Justice indicated that during the period from 2005 to 2007, 6,370 persons had been questioned in case no. 97/P/1990. In addition, 1,100 ballistics reports had been prepared, more than 10,... |
1 July 1995 | 13. By a judgment of 30 May 1994, the DCC declared the defendants liable for the damage caused to the applicant’s house. It ordered them to build a new house for the applicant, equivalent to that which had been damaged, by |
from 11 May 2005 to 30 November 2011 | 9. On 29 February 2012 the Chișinău Court of Appeal upheld the appeal, quashed the first-instance judgment and delivered a new judgment, acknowledging a violation of the applicant’s right under Article 6 of the Convention resulting from the non-enforcement of a final judgment for a period of 78 months ( |
10 August 1999 | 17. On 4 March 1999 the Regional Court appointed a curator ad litem to represent E in the proceedings before that court. On 17 March 1999 the Regional Court rejected the foster parents' complaint. On |
January 2009 | 38. On 18 and 19 February 2010 two doctors from the Tula Regional Dermatovenerology Clinic examined the applicant. After a visual examination of his hands and feet they concluded that the applicant suffered from “onychomycosis of the finger and toenails”. The report had a postscript indicating that the applicant had b... |
2 February 1996 | 38. Currently, there are inhabitants living and cultivating fields in Suçıktı. 1. Documents submitted by the applicant
(a) A copy of the applicant’s petition to the Governor’s office in Diyarbakır, dated |
14 January 2002 | 20. In September 2001 the Vice-President of the Donetsk Court of Appeal, in reply to a complaint from the applicant that he was not being allowed family visits, informed him that the hearing in his case had been fixed for |
the last years | 10. On 22 August 1994 the Düsseldorf Regional Court (Landgericht) rejected the applicant's appeal. After having heard E, the court estimated that the foster parents had become E's reference persons. E had indicated that she wished to stay with the foster parents whom she called “mum and dad” and that she regarded the ... |
17 January 1995 | 34. The court established that, on 13 January 1995, the applicant had brought two women who were sisters from Slovakia to Spain on the false pretext of offering them a job as tourist guides. He threatened to shoot them, took away their passports and plane tickets and forced one of them to stay at night in a club where... |
between 1998 and 2001 | 9. On 5 August 2002 the respondent appealed, reiterating, inter alia, that the applicant's action was time-barred. The latter replied that, in view of the respondent's continuous promises to discharge the debt, she could not have concluded that her rights had been breached |
21 April 2001 | 8. On 25 July 1996 LG, the daughter of the applicant and his partner SG, a Lithuanian citizen, was born in Lithuania. In 2001 the applicant was officially registered as the father of LG. The applicant married SG on |
fifteen days’ | 74. On the basis of the report written by Police Officer Y., the court established that at 8.30 p.m. on 6 May 2012 the applicant had been walking along the road at Bolotnaya Square and obstructing the traffic, and that he had then disobeyed lawful police orders to vacate the venue. The Justice of the Peace rejected as... |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.