target stringlengths 11 70 | prompt stringlengths 200 10k |
|---|---|
1 September 2001 | 21. On 20 December 2000, following amendments to the Code of Criminal Procedure, the Lublin Court of Appeal ordered that the applicant be kept in custody until 30 May 2001. The next decision was given on 9 May 2001 and the court extended the applicant's detention until |
21 May 1999 | 6. On 18 May 1999 the applicant sued his former employer, a private company, for reinstatement, wage arrears and compensation for damage. The acknowledgment of receipt card indicated that the Aleksin Town Court had received the statement of claim on |
three years’ | 7. E.J. further stated:
“... My friend R. (referring to R.M.) stopped another taxi driver. He was the one who drove us to a water canal. We told him that we wanted to go to Greece and that we didn’t have any travel documents, but he said: ‘I will take you, but each of you will have to pay 160 euros (EUR)’. We immediat... |
28 June 2006 | 29. In a public hearing held on 18 November 2008 in the presence of the applicants and their lawyers, the Štip Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal lodged by the applicants, finding no grounds to depart from the established facts and reasons given by the trial court. It found that the special investigating measures (a... |
7 January 1997 | 14. A first trial hearing took place before the Haarlem Regional Court (arrondissementsrechtbank) on 30 September 1996. On 14 October 1996 the Regional Court gave an interlocutory judgment remitting the case to the investigating judge (rechter-commissaris) for additional investigations.
A second trial hearing was held... |
12 October 2016 | 36. At a hearing on 28 September 2016 the IPC accepted the applicant’s Turkish Cypriot representatives’ withdrawal from the case and decided that the applicant should be contacted directly during the future course of the proceedings. Another hearing was scheduled for |
25 January 2006 | 8. On 25 January 2006 Mr Ibragim Kushtov was driving his VAZ-21074 car with registration number B309TX15 (in the documents submitted the number was also referred to as B309КX15) near Magas airport in Ingushetia when he was stopped by policemen, forced into a Niva vehicle and taken away. His car was left behind. The ci... |
the summer of 1989 | 9. The applicant is a German national who was born in 1915. He has an illegitimate daughter, Isa, who was born in 1985. Both before and after her birth, relations between the parents were strained. Until |
20 September 2000 | 12. The applicants, who had been waiting for the Sofia City Court’s judgment since 10 May 1999, the date of the last hearing, checked the register on an unspecified date between 19 August and 20 September 2000. On |
18 June 1993 | 17. As the Gaziantep Municipal Council had failed to fulfil certain of its obligations under the agreement, in particular its financial obligations, the second applicant, as President of the trade union, brought civil proceedings against it in the Gaziantep District Court (“the District Court”) on |
three months | 38. It found that the contempt had been proved to the criminal standard. On sentence, the court explained that misuse of the Internet by a juror was always “a most serious irregularity” and that an effective custodial sentence was virtually inevitable to ensure that the integrity of the process of trial by jury was su... |
1 July 2005 | 29. The applicant is an agricultural company. On 27 May 2005, it concluded a contract by which it purchased, for an unspecified amount, restitution claims for substitute plots of land, the nominal value of which was CZK 1,247,292 (EUR 51,971). On the basis of a contract concluded on |
25 July 2004 | 8. He also claimed to belong to the Fur ethnic group through his paternal line, and the Bergo ethnic group through his maternal line. He further alleged to have lived in Zalingei until 25 July 2004, when he had had to flee his village. He stated that shortly before he fled, his father had been killed and he had been ... |
2 June 2008 | 5. At the time of the events giving rise to the application, Hyde Park (the first applicant) was registered with the Moldovan Ministry of Justice as a non-governmental organisation lobbying, inter alia, for freedom of expression and the right to peaceful assembly. In 2007 its members decided to discontinue the organis... |
October 2005 | 19. According to the Government's observations, thirty-three requests for review were lodged outside the one-year time-limit from the date of the judgment's entry into force. In such cases, the respondent authority also applied for extension of the time-limit for application for supervisory review arguing that it had ... |
3 June 2002 | 11. On 27 May 2002 the Rzeszów Social Security Board asked the Main Social Security Board’s doctor (Główny Lekarz Orzecznik) to inform it whether the applicant’s daughter required the permanent care of a parent. On |
28 January 2006 | 80. On 8 March 2006 L.B.-dze, with no lawyer present, was called to identify the “fourth man”, who had arrived last at the cemetery. According to the video recording of this investigative measure, among the four men in the line-up to be presented to L.B.-dze, O.M.-ov took the third position from the left. The public p... |
from 27 March 2003 to 16 February 2005 | 43. On 3 January 2005 the applicant lodged a complaint about the length of the criminal proceedings under the Act of 17 June 2004. On 23 February 2005 the Katowice Court of Appeal dismissed his complaint. In 17 pages of written reasons the court analysed the course of the proceedings |
Three years | 10. On 4 May 2010 the Migration Court (Migrationsdomstolen) upheld the decision of the Board. The court considered that the letter to the applicant’s wife was clearly connected to her work and held that the applicant had failed to show that there was a connection between the letter, the kidnapping and death of his son... |
21 May 2004 | 55. On 24 May 2012 the District Court found the applicant guilty on several counts of theft and sentenced him to eight years’ imprisonment combined with the confiscation of all his property. Given the applicant’s conviction under the judgment of |
17 March 2011 | 32. On 16 May 2011 the Moscow Regional Court examined submissions from L. and extended the applicant’s detention until 21 November 2011, concluding that, if at large, the applicant would flee justice. The court also noted that the Court had made an indication under Rule 39 of the Rules of Court, thus (temporarily) pre... |
from 1988 to date | 25. As to redress, the Constitutional Court increased the compensation to EUR 14,000, but revoked the part of the judgment ordering the release of the property. It considered that since the requisition had been lawful and in the public interest, it was for the court to redress the lack of a fair balance but it was not... |
23 January 2002 | 22. On 19 November 2001 the Lomonosovskiy District Court again stayed the proceedings and reaffirmed the order of 26 January 2000, as the defendant had agreed to reimburse the costs of the expert examination. On |
22 February 2001 | 32. The applicant appealed again on points of law, arguing that the acts he had committed were not the crimes he had been accused of.
The Supreme Court of Justice held three hearings in the case; the applicant was represented by counsel of his choosing and assisted by an interpreter. On |
9 August 2011 | 45. On 10 October 2011 another letter from the applicant’s mother was received, in which she submitted that the conditions of his detention in the prison amounted to his “constant torture”. In substantiation, she enclosed an incomplete photocopy of the applicant’s letter to her dated |
10 June 1999 | 44. On 26 April 1999 the applicant filed a complaint. He argued that the investigation into the case had ended. The file was submitted to the Trenčín Regional Court on 20 May 1999. The Regional Court dismissed the complaint on |
29 September 2009 | 26. In January 2009 the expert submitted his (fourth supplementary) report. On 7 April 2009 the Hanover Regional Court requested the expert to give a supplementary statement. Another hearing was scheduled for |
29 April-5 May 2002 | 22. On 10 February 2003 the applicant spoke with a resident of Goyty, who informed him that a shepherd who had been tending cattle in the abandoned orchard (known as the Michurina orchard or the Michurina district orchard) on a State collective farm near the road between Goyty and Urus-Martan had seen a fresh hole in ... |
13 May 2002 | 13. On 30 April 2002 the investigator asked the Healthcare Centre for information on whether the applicant had been known to be suffering from a mental disease. On 5 May 2002 the Healthcare Centre confirmed that the applicant had been under psychiatric treatment for schizophrenia since 1998. Relying on this informatio... |
18 February 2003 | 22. On 20 January 2003 the applicant requested the Supreme Court to stay the cassation proceedings, in view of the fact that the supervisory proceedings were pending (see paragraph 10 above). In a letter of |
14 and 16 November 2005 | 23. On 19 October 2005 the investigator informed the applicants in writing that the preliminary investigation had been terminated. On 11 November 2005 the case materials were presented to the applicants in prison. However, because at that time no appropriate equipment had been provided, it was only on |
11 November 2004 | 24. Both applicants have been plaintiffs in proceedings concerning the validity of a purchase contract. The proceedings were brought on 27 January 2000 and the first instance court gave its decision on |
22 December 2003 | 18. The Restitution Commission also referred to an examination carried out on-site on 10 December 2003 (the report of which was not submitted in evidence) according to which petrol tanks had been installed on the relevant part of plot no. 2943/6 (вкопани цистерни за гориво). The Commission also quoted a letter of |
the next day | 50. The next day the applicant’s representative, Ms Moskalenko, requested the court to adjourn the hearing for one day in order to allow the defence to study new materials submitted by the prosecution. The court ordered a one-and-a-half hour break but refused to adjourn the hearing to |
25 August 2009 | 24. After being notified of the Court of Cassation’s judgment, the applicants left Italy in July 2009. They moved to the Netherlands, where the second applicant was issued with a five-year residence permit on |
9 August 2003 | 74. Between 2003 and 2009 the applicant complained of his brother’s abduction to various authorities. He complained to the Chechen prosecutor’s office, the President of Chechnya, the Russian Prosecutor General, the Russian Ministry of the Interior, and the Russian President on 21 June, 15 July, 4 and |
22 March 1945 | 17. The City Court further established that in May 1945 a military tribunal of the Soviet army had sentenced Mr Slobodník to fifteen years’ imprisonment on the ground that he had attended the training course in Sekule and had been ordered, on |
9 September 1997 | 61. On 15 July 1997 the Tomaszów Mazowiecki District Court held the next hearing. The court heard evidence from the expert J.G. As the Kwidzyń District Court had not interviewed J.S., the court decided not to give a preliminary ruling and adjourned the hearing until |
6 June 2003 | 36. On 10 March 2005 the Appellate Chamber of the Economic Court of Moldova rejected these claims. The court found that the applicant company could not claim to have been a good faith buyer, since it had failed to pay for the hotel within seven days as prescribed by the auction regulations. The court also found that t... |
between 3 and 5 April 2006 | 27. Following a request of 4 August 2010, on the same date the Head of Kharkiv City Ophthalmology Clinic no. 14 confirmed to the Kharkiv Regional Police Department (Головне управління Міністерства внутрішніх справ України в Харківській області) that the applicant had been examined on 6 May 2005. No surgery had been re... |
25 March 1996 | 24. On 1 April 1996 the applicant submitted a petition to the prosecutor at the State Security Court in Diyarbakır in which he stated that his son had been detained by members of the security forces on |
18 August 1999 | 27. The applicants appealed to the Supreme Administrative Court, requesting an oral hearing. On 1 March 1999 and 14 July 1999 respectively the court received the Ministry of the Environment's submissions. As the court invited the applicants' further submissions, it informed them that all the material pertaining to the... |
over two years | 7. On 5 May 2003 the police searched the flat owned by the applicant situated at the address of his permanent residence (prebivalište). The applicant's mother, who was present at the search, stated that the applicant had not lived in that flat for |
twenty years’ | 32. On 5 December 2006 the investigation judge remanded the applicant in custody for one month on the grounds that there was a danger of absconding and that the offences allegedly committed by the applicant were serious ones. The relevant part of the decision reads:
“This court finds that the grounds for detention und... |
7 April 2005 | 13. On 4 November 2004 the same court, acting as a court of appeal, upheld the contested judgment, holding that the evidence in the case file was sufficient to find that the applicant had knowingly and intentionally collaborated with the communist secret services. The applicant submitted a cassation appeal to the Supr... |
30 March 2007 | 22. In the initial phase of the proceedings the applicant was represented by a lawyer of his choice. On 19 March 2007 the lawyer in question withdrew from the case and the applicant asked the trial court to appoint a legal-aid lawyer to represent him.
On |
the early 1950s | 7. Hizb ut-Tahrir al-Islami (The Party of Islamic Liberation – hereinafter “Hizb ut-Tahrir”) is an international Islamic organisation with branches in many parts of the world, including the Middle East and Europe. It advocates the overthrow of governments and their replacement by an Islamic State in the form of a recr... |
22 March 2005 | 13. On 3 February 2005 the police department of the Khabarovsk Region prepared a decision that the first applicant’s presence on Russian territory was undesirable and submitted it to the head of the Federal Migration Service for approval. The draft decision indicated that the first applicant had been unlawfully reside... |
September 2013 | 52. The children’s father had been in Iraq for months, and had stated in his testimony as a party to the case that he was building a house and was engaged to be married to a new woman. He had no plans to return to Norway, and he planned to settle permanently in Iraq. The father had last been in Norway during the crimi... |
7 October 1997 | 11. On 9 June 1997 the case file was submitted to the Prešov Regional Court for a decision on the defendant’s appeal of 14 October 1996. The Regional Court decided on the appeal on 27 June 1997 and the case file was returned to the District Court on |
2 April 2011 | 16. On 12 and 14 April 2011 the investigator questioned T.Y. and N.S. as witnesses in connection with the applicant’s ill-treatment complaint. The two witnesses, who had also been arrested on 2 April 2011 and detained in the temporary detention centre of the NDPO, confirmed that on |
19 August 1999 | 11. The protest was examined on 26 February 2001 by the Presidium of the Kyiv City Court. Having accepted the reasons advanced by the Deputy President of the Supreme Court, the Presidium quashed the judgment |
24 January 2001 | 24. In the meantime, on 21 December 2000, Law no. 4616 on Conditional Release, Deferral of Procedure and Punishments was promulgated. However, the benefits of this Law were not available to persons who had committed offences under Articles 146 and 168 of the Criminal Code. Thus, it was not applicable to the applicants... |
27 October 2014 | 34. Alarmed by the first applicant’s admission of self-harm in the school essay, on 22 November 2014 the second applicant took her to the same psychologist who had examined her on 5 March and 22 April 2011. In her observations the psychologist noted the following:
“[The girl] came accompanied by her mother because the... |
27 September 2009 | 18. On 17 February 2011 the Constitutional Court (Ustavni sud Republike Hrvatske) dismissed the applicant’s constitutional complaint and served its decision on her representative on 14 March 2011. The relevant part of that decision reads as follows:
“The Constitutional Court observes that the complainant justifies her... |
recent years | 5. On 26 March 2004 the applicant acquired an apartment in Housing Cooperative (“borettslag”) X. At her request, on 29 March 2004 its Governing Board (hereinafter “the Board”) approved the applicant’s acquisition. Before she moved in, the Board became aware that the applicant’s son, Mr A, had caused serious problems i... |
10 December 2008 | 13. From 10 December 2008 until 8 October 2010 the applicant had been kept in solitary confinement, alone in 8-square-metre cells equipped with two sleeping places. The solitary confinement had been a consequence of the applicant’s sentencing to life imprisonment on |
the eve of 31 May | 54. In May 2006 the Memorial Human Rights Centre reported its findings at the location of the “illegal jail” in the Oktyabrskiy district of Grozny. Memorial’s representatives examined and took video footage and photographs of the building after it had been vacated by the Oktyabrskiy police department (see paragraphs 3... |
over seven years | 32. On 25 July 2018 the applicant sent yet another letter to the Chief Prosecutor’s Office complaining of the lack of progress in the investigation. He criticised the fact that despite having consistently maintained that he could identify the officers who had ill-treated him, no arrangements had been made for an ident... |
1 January 2003 | 12. In the meantime, on 7 May 2007 the Ministry requested clarification of the judgment of 27 October 1999 as regards the method of index-linking. On 25 June 2007 the Town Court held that, as a result of changes in the relevant legislation, as of |
1 November 2004 | 58. On 6 September 2005 a senior prosecutor of the prison supervision department of the Kharkiv Regional Prosecutor’s Office, following additional investigation, decided not to bring any charges against the prison officials. His final report repeated, in substance, the findings in the report of |
17 May 2000 | 12. Mr S.-S.A. told Mr R. Dz. that due to the curfew they had to leave immediately and return in the morning. Upon returning home Mr R. Dz. informed the applicant's nephew, whose house was nearby, about the events. The men agreed to return to the lorry in the morning on |
the following day | 49. The Government submitted that in the morning of 17 August 2009 the applicant had violently resisted the warders’ attempts to transfer him to a punishment cell, where he was to stay for fifteen days because of another disciplinary offence. The applicant had tried to punch the director of the punishment ward, Mr St.... |
13 February 2001 | 57. An expert report of 11 March 2010, drafted by doctors D.M. and I.Š., indicated that there had been no irregularity in the medical treatment of the applicants’ mother. It further found that the drug, to which the applicant’s mother was allergic, had neither been used nor indicated for use during her treatment on |
the same date | 37. The next day the applicant’s court-appointed representative P.C., the applicant’s father I.M. and her chosen representative D.P. were present at the hearing. D.P. proposed that the hearing be rescheduled since the applicant had not been properly summoned. She also informed the local court that the applicant was be... |
24 September 2003 | 18. The recommendation of the Committee of Ministers to Member States of the Council of Europe concerning new ways of dealing with juvenile delinquency and the role of juvenile justice (Rec (2003)20), adopted on |
February 1988 | 36. T. left home in November 1984, after she had become pregnant and had a child. By January 1988, she was living at an address with her 3 year old daughter and was in contact with the social services concerning her financial problems. In |
24 May 2004 | 25. In an order of 27 February 2006 issued without the parties being present, the Latgale District Court granted F.H. Ltd.’s request in full. It ordered the recognition and enforcement of the Limassol District Court’s judgment of |
20 August 2008 | 36. On 10 July 2008 the Court, acting under Rule 39 of the Rules of Court, requested that the Government transfer the applicant to the NCO for more chemotherapy. On 14 July 2008 the applicant was transferred to the NCO, where he had a tomography scan, which showed that there had been no progression of his retroperiton... |
29 December 2003 | 14. On 26 December 2006 the applicant submitted that she intended to pursue her application before the Court. She claimed that on 19 June 2006 the Administration had invited her to sign an agreement. According to the applicant, the Administration forced her to sign the agreement by saying that if she did not sign it, ... |
4 January 2007 | 18. On 5 February 2007 the Gornostaevsky Prosecutor’s Office sent a petition to the head of the Gornostaevsky Police Department, stating that the applicant’s detention had breached criminal procedural law. According to the petition, the applicant had been arrested on |
26 October 1999 | 6. On 4 October 1999 the Gdańsk District Court decided to detain the applicant on remand. The decision was based on the high probability that the applicant had committed the crimes with which he had been charged, which was confirmed by evidence, in particular the testimonies of one of the co-accused. In addition, the ... |
12 April 2010 | 18. In autumn 2008 disputes arose between the applicant and I.N. In September 2008 I.N. complained to the Service that the applicant had withdrawn money from the twins’ bank account, without her knowledge or permission, as the administrator of the twin’s property. A criminal case for fraud was opened against the appli... |
the previous night | 9. On 20 December, detectives and scene of crime officers attended the scene. Items were taken for forensic examination, including 9mm spent cartridge cases. A number of persons who had been in the bar on |
24 June and 9 August 2017 | 54. It appears from the information provided by the Government that while detained in Lukiškės Remand Prison in 2014 the applicant had sixteen short visits, in 2015 he had twenty short visits and in 2016 he had ten short visits. It appears that in while detained in Šiauliai Remand Prison 2016 the applicant had four sh... |
1 December 2009 | 30. In the beginning of November 2009 the applicant was transferred to temporary detention facility no. IZ-56/2, where he stayed until his return to the tuberculosis hospital in correctional colony no. 5 on |
19 July 1984 | 6. The applicant was born in 1947. After a number of periods in prison and hospital the applicant was admitted to Ashworth Special Hospital (“Ashworth”) from prison under sections 47 and 49 of the Mental Health Act 1983 on |
five years and three months’ | 10. On 16 December 2004 the Supreme Court of the Canton of Zurich convicted the applicant of homicide with indirect intent (Eventualvorsatz) and serious violations of the rules of road traffic. On 4 October 2000, while he was engaged in a car race on a public road with an acquaintance, the applicant, driving at a spee... |
22 June 1995 | 21. On 7 June 1995 counsel requested a suspension of the proceedings until the applicant’s return to Austria in order to hear him in person. On the same day, the IAP informed counsel that the decision would be pronounced publicly on |
30 May 2012 | 21. A hearing in the judicial review proceedings took place on 9 February 2012. With the agreement of the parties, the Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis was joined as a defendant. The High Court handed down its judgment on |
19 June 2001 | 51. Referring to the information provided by the Prosecutor General’s Office, the Government submitted that the applicant’s written complaint concerning the abduction of her son had been received by the Urus-Martan prosecutor’s office on |
23 September 2005 | 24. On 23 August 2005 the applicant's detention was prolonged until 25 October 2005. The Court of Appeal referred in its decision to the fact that the trial had to commence de novo. That decision was upheld on appeal on |
the same day | 14. When the APCs and the UAZ vehicles left, the second applicant went outside. At about the same moment Ms A. came to the applicants' home together with her husband. The second applicant took his car and tried to follow the tracks left by the APCs and the UAZ vehicles. He arrived at the roadblock of the federal force... |
7 March 2012 | 35. On 11 May 2012 the applicant party received a letter from the Ankara governor’s office ordering it to pay the amounts indicated in the Constitutional Court decision concerning the review of the 2007 final accounts, which totalled TRY 3,372,446 (approximately EUR 1,435,000 on |
12 January 2003 | 29. In January 2003 the applicants informed the administration of prison no. 29/13 in Chişinău about their fear of reprisals by a group of detainees in that prison. The applicants asked to be transferred to prison 29/4. They were transferred to that prison on |
9 February 1996 | 12. The Government did not challenge most of the facts as presented by the applicant. With reference to the contents of the criminal investigation file, but without providing copies of the relevant documents, the Government submitted the following:
“In the morning of |
9 September 2004 | 10. Ilinden was founded on 14 April 1990. In 1990 it applied for registration. The courts refused, holding that “its statute and programme were directed against the unity of the nation” (see Stankov and the United Macedonian Organisation Ilinden v. Bulgaria, nos. 29221/95 and 29225/95, §§ 10‑14, ECHR 2001‑IX). Its sec... |
16 June 1999 | 13. The record of the hearing on 2 November 1999 mentions that the applicant was present, which the applicant himself denies. He states that he attended his trial for the last time on 5 May 1999 and that after the adjournment of |
the beginning of April 2006 | 42. On that same date the applicant's mother lodged a complaint with the Prosecutor-General, stating that the administration of the Sevastopol ITT had unlawfully refused to hospitalise her son, whose health condition was extremely grave. She stated in particular that since |
8 November 2008 | 184. Application no. 26309/13 was lodged on 18 April 2013 by C.Z., born on 29 October 1974, and S.Z., born on 2 October 1976, who live in Simpsonville, South Carolina, United States (the US applicants), and A.K., who was born on |
eight months | 7. The applicant was not arrested, as on 24 November 2006 he gave a written undertaking to comply with investigators’ orders and summons. During the subsequent eight months he fully complied with the written undertaking and actively participated in the criminal investigation, attending investigative actions whenever s... |
the same day | 30. On 18 October 2007 the State Prosecutor (Prokurator Krajowy) gave a decision authorising a search of the applicant’s cell and seizure of illegal items, in particular drugs and other psychotropic substances. On |
12 September 2000 | 27. On 12 September 2000 the Kuntsevskiy District Court of Moscow, when remitting the case to the prosecutor’s office, ordered that the applicant and five other defendants remain in custody. The court cited no reasons for ordering such detention. On 25 January 2001 the Moscow City Court upheld the decision of |
the previous three months | 19. In appeal statements, the defence disagreed that there was a risk of influencing witnesses, and cited the applicant’s serious health condition and the detention facility’s continued failure to ensure his transfer to a hospital. The lawyers also argued that the investigative authorities had been idle in |
three-month | 109. As for the applicant’s prospects of settling with E. and their child in Russia, Mr Heinonen indicated that in accordance with current practice even a common-law spouse of foreign origin could be granted a |
19 December 2001 | 44. On 18 March 2003 a deputy prosecutor of the Sverdlovskiy District dismissed the applicant's ill-treatment complaint as manifestly ill-founded. The decision repeated the wording of the previous two decisions refusing the institution of criminal proceedings against the police officers. In addition, a deputy prosecut... |
a month before | 55. On 5 September 2002 the second applicant was granted the status of victim in connection with the proceedings in case no. 59232 and was questioned. He stated that at about 4 a.m. on 11 August 2002 unidentified persons wearing masks and camouflage uniforms and armed with submachine guns had entered his courtyard. Mu... |
between 14 April and 14 May 2001 | 40. On 26 July 2002 the Moskovskiy District Court of Tver, acting pursuant to Article 125 of the Russian Federation Code of Criminal Procedure, held that the applicant’s detention had been lawful:
“[Mr] Fursenko is charged with two offences ... for which only punishment in the form of deprivation of liberty is provide... |
4 March 1979 | 15. The applicant – who by that time had attained the age of majority – had not been placed under guardianship, had never signed a declaration that she had consented to her placement in the institution, and there had been no judicial decision authorising her detention in a psychiatric hospital. The private clinic of D... |
14 October 2004 | 17. On 23 August 2004 the Sabayil District Court dismissed the applicant’s complaint and upheld the prosecutor’s decision. In essence, it reiterated the prosecutor’s reasons for suspending the proceedings and found them lawful. Its decision was silent as to the applicant’s continued inability to leave his place of res... |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.