target stringlengths 11 70 | prompt stringlengths 200 10k |
|---|---|
14 October 2003 | 34. On 17 December 2002 a telephone company sued the applicant for a sum of money. The Nitra District Court issued a payment order which was quashed following the applicant’s objection. In a judgment of |
7 June 2010 | 37. Also in April 2010, the St Petersburg department of the Federal Security Service (FSB) (“the regional department of the FSB”) refused to disclose any information about the alleged detention of the applicants’ four relatives, referring to the absence of a legal representation contract between the applicants and the... |
21 April 2008 | 34. On 10 September 2008 the first applicant received information from the Latvian Central Authority about the request made by the Italian Central Authority. The first applicant was informed that Latvia had an obligation to enforce the |
1 November 2010 | 39. On 30 May 2007 the authorities discontinued the criminal proceedings against the applicant due to the expiry of the statutory prosecution period. Apparently, on an unspecified date this decision was quashed. On |
18 April 2007 | 15. As the applicant committed another offence while on probation and did not undergo any treatment for his alcohol dependency, he was required to serve the prison sentence imposed by the judgment of |
more than eleven years | 33. Even if the applicant might already have been conscious of the fact that she had been placed in the clinic against her will, it was established that during her long stays in the psychiatric hospital she had been forced to take very strong medication. When she had been released from the clinic, she had still receiv... |
30 November 1996 | 9. On 13 September 1996 the Mayor of Warsaw asked the Board of Appeal to extend the time-limit as he needed to obtain some additional documents. On 30 September 1996 the Mayor asked for an extension of the time-limit until |
24 September 2003 | 12. On unspecified dates the ninety-one companies, including the applicant company, were sent letters asking them to comply within ten days of the date of receipt of the letter. They were also warned that their licences might be suspended in case of non-compliance in accordance with section 3.4 of the ANRTI Regulation... |
12 January 2002 | 7. The applicant’s aunt made an application for indefinite leave to remain in the United Kingdom, on the basis of her long stay, and with the applicant listed as her dependant, on 24 January 2003. While this application was under consideration, a further application for indefinite leave was made on behalf of the appli... |
the same period of time | 27. In its report for 2010 (page 142 et seq. – “Conditions of detention” chapter), the Centre for Human Rights in Moldova (“the Centre”, which is the Moldovan Ombudsman institution) found, inter alia, that:
“... [T]he Prisons Department informed the ombudsman that meat and fish products were provided [to detainees] wh... |
18 July 2000 | 22. On 28 February 2001 the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation quashed the decision of 23 November 2000. It found that, after the case had been remitted for an additional investigation on 18 July 2000, the prosecution had not remedied the defects identified by the Regional Court. In particular, the prosecution ha... |
30 June 2003 | 35. On 3 July 2003 the district military commander’s office informed the applicant that they had conducted an inquiry into her allegations about the abduction of her son at the checkpoint and stated the following:
“... as of |
the end of December 2002 | 36. On 31 January 2003 the investigators questioned Mr Makhadi M., who stated that he lived at 72 Shkolnaya Street in Zakan-Yurt; the household comprised two dwellings in one yard: his house and the house of his nephew, Mr Magomed M. At |
12 May 2014 | 84. On 28 April 2014 the applicant submitted to the Sheki Court for Serious Crimes his remarks concerning the transcripts of the trial hearings, of which he had time to read about 500 pages. He alleged that in a number of instances various statements by witnesses had been distorted or misrepresented in the transcripts... |
19 May 2005 | 23. On 13 April 2005 the applicant received the keys to flat no. 68, 9/1, Stroiteley Avenue. However, it appears that another tenant had already obtained the title to the flat by that time. Thus, on 6 May 2005 the municipality decided to allocate another flat to the applicant (no. 72). The applicant accepted the flat,... |
28 February | 57. Between October 2006 and the applicant’s release on 31 January 2008 all requests by the applicant’s wife for visits were refused. In particular, the Katowice Appeal Prosecutor dismissed requests made on 8 January, |
27 January 2005 | 13. At the hearing on 12 October 2004, the applicant objected to the above assessment and requested a new one. The second psychiatric assessment carried out by the Psychiatric Clinic of the Zagreb Medical School supported the first one. The relevant parts of the report drawn up by a psychiatrist, M.K., on |
1 March 2004 | 18. On 19 May 2004 the second applicant told the prosecutor that he had not handed anything to the first applicant, that he had not known what the small package found in the car contained and that he had only agreed to accompany the first applicant to the car because the latter had told the second applicant that he ha... |
the past year | 9. Assisted by legal counsel, the applicant stated in essence the following in support of her application. Her main reason for leaving Iraq was the generally insecure situation for Mandaeans in Iraq, which had affected her and her family personally. Her fears had led to her son going to school only sporadically during... |
27 May 2002 | 11. On 22 April 2002, during a meeting of the school's governors, the first applicant's husband raised the question of the presence of religious symbols in the classrooms, particularly mentioning crucifixes, and asked whether they ought to be removed. On |
twelve years’ | 37. On 31 January 1997 the applicant was found guilty of having forged tax documents with a view to obtaining an unlawful gain for himself and others and of having suborned a witness. He was sentenced to |
8 August 2002 | 14. On 16 September 2002 the Wrocław Court of Appeal dismissed an appeal by the applicant against the extension of his detention ordered on 8 August 2002. One of the judges (W.K.) dismissing the appeal had also presided over the court's session on |
20 July 1999 | 20. On 20 July 1999 the CGP informed the CDGA and the regional commands (via message HRK no.: 0621-2533-99) of that incident, following which the rebels had allegedly attempted to occupy the roofs, having climbed up through the ventilation shafts and forced the duty guards to back off; they had also reportedly stolen ... |
13 July 1999 | 10. By a letter of 24 November 1999, the Head of the Torez Police Department informed the Torez Prosecutor that the applicants had been taken to the police station on 10 July 1999. As they had made contradictory statements and referred to witnesses who could prove their alibi, their statements had to be verified by th... |
seven years old | 35. On 7 April 2010 the Dąbrowa Tarnowska District Court modified the judgment of 30 June 2006 and banned any contact between the applicant and his younger son B. The court found that the applicant had never wanted his second child, contested his paternity of him and had seen B only twice: once after B's birth in 2003... |
31 March 1995 | 22. On 21 March 1994, the Court of Appeal allocated a hearing date of 5 or 6 December 1994 for the appeal. However, in light of the uncertainties associated with Ferranti’s receivership, the appeal was stood out of the list by consent until |
31 March 2011 | 19. By a judgment of 10 July 2012 the Warsaw Regional Court allowed his claim and awarded him PLN 82,988, corresponding to the value of the land concerned. The court stressed that it was not in dispute that the original administrative decision had been unlawful. Nor was it in dispute that that decision had caused dama... |
4 June 2003 | 20. On 30 May 2003 the first applicant wrote to the acting President of the Chechen Republic, to a deputy of the State Duma and to the military prosecutor of the Chechen Republic complaining about the detention of her daughter and demanding assistance in establishing her whereabouts. On |
11 January 2013 | 63. On 28 January 2013 the head of the Taldom Town Investigations Committee annulled the decision of 21 January 2013 and ordered a further inquiry. He ordered, in particular, that the investigative measures set out in the decision of |
the same day | 29. Also on 4 February 2010, the investigators examined six DVDs containing records of the city transport monitoring system (recordings from CCTV street cameras) made on the night when the applicants’ relatives had gone missing along their presumed route. According to the transcript prepared on |
the same day | 17. When questioned by an investigator on 25 August 2004 and in the presence of his lawyer V.B., the applicant partly confessed to having fraudulently used a bank card. He denied the charges of theft and unlawful possession of a firearm.
On |
7 November 2002 | 9. On 7 November 2002 the Buiucani District Court rejected the applicant's challenge to the decision of 28 December 2001 as lodged out of time. The applicant appealed, claiming that she had never received a summons to the hearing of |
26 November 2009 | 34. During the applicant’s stay in the prison hospital, he underwent a full clinical examination, including blood and urine tests, chest, abdominal and kidney X-rays and ultrasound scans, sputum smear and urine culture testing, monitoring of renal functions, screening by a tuberculosis urologist, which revealed no new... |
19 January 2007 | 10. Following an appeal, in a judgment of 20 July 2007 the Varna Regional Court increased the compensation under the applicant’s first claim to BGN 500 (EUR 255) and upheld the remaining part of the judgment of |
19 April 2005 | 9. On 19 April 2005 the Dzerzhinsky District Police of Kharkiv arrested the applicant at her mother’s home address and drew up an arrest report, the relevant parts of which read as follows:
“Investigator ... L., on |
30 December 2002 | 40. The applicant sent a number of letters to the Forensic Psychiatry Board, in which she criticised the psychiatric assessment conducted by Dr A.K., among other things. She also submitted to the Board Dr K.A.’s divergent medical opinion of |
6 August 1993 | 16. In reaching this decision, the Łódź Regional Court considered that in the proceedings in question the time-limits for serving summonses set out in the Code of Civil Procedure did not apply. The applicant's lawyer had been aware that the proceedings had been instituted since |
1 October 2012 | 48. After the communication of the present application to the Russian Government on 14 September 2012, the Housing Commission allocated a flat located in the Saint-Petersburg suburbs to the applicant. On |
28 June 2011 | 15. On 25 April 2012 the applicant appealed against the judgment, repeating the complaints he had made before the first-instance court and alleging that he ought to have been informed of the consequences of a request for a reassessment of his disability. If that had been the case, he would have “forbidden” his doctor ... |
22/23 December | 18. The second applicant gave statements on 11 January 2005. He declared that before 23 December 2004 he had not known of any dealings in drugs that his brother might have had, that during the night of |
21 November 2000 | 20. On 26 April 2000 the Hamm Court of Appeal therefore scheduled a new hearing for 25 August 2000. Again, no previous hearing date at which both parties' representatives could attend had been found. Due to the absence of a witness summoned at the request of the applicant and her husband, it had to be postponed to |
11 May 2005 | 15. On 20 April 2005 the first applicant filed a claim to alter the mode of enforcement of the judgment of 15 November 2004 from in-kind provision of the room to monetary compensation for its acquisition. His claim was granted by the Oktyabrskiy District Court of Izhevsk on |
the past week | 10. According to the information in the case file, the applicant was still in a critical condition on the morning of 15 October 2008. Nevertheless, at 3 p.m. on that day, he was interviewed by two gendarme officers in the office of the security team commander (Asayiş Tim Komutanı) of the local gendarmerie. It is not c... |
11 March 2009 | 22. On 2 February 2009 the District Court found the lorry driver guilty of having committed the crime of endangering others under the influence of alcohol. It referred the applicant company with its claim to a civil court. The decision became final on |
14 November 2004 | 60. The Government stated that a number of witness confrontations were conducted by the investigators as a result of which the witness statements made by the police officers had been confirmed. In particular, on an unspecified date the investigators conducted a witness confrontation between officer V.K. and the third ... |
twelve months | 10. The applicant subsequently became addicted to heroin. Between 30 December 1991 and 24 May 2006 he was convicted 32 times for 52 offences, including driving offences, assaulting a police officer, assault occasioning actual bodily harm, criminal damage, possession of an offensive weapon, possession and supply of cont... |
the period between 16 February and 11 May 2002 | 14. The Guardianship Authority then contacted a child upbringing counsellor (“nevelési tanácsadó”) who recommended the assistance of a foundation specialised in facilitating visits. It therefore ordered that the regular visits scheduled for |
20 April 1993 | 23. On 21 April 1993 the Regional Court invited the Slovak Ministry to present its observations in reply to the action. In its response of 6 May 1993 the Ministry primarily contested its standing to be sued in the case, arguing that it had not assumed the authority of the Federal Ministry under the Lustration Act. Rel... |
10 July 2002 | 18. Subsequently on numerous occasions (20 June 2002, 18 July 2002, 21 October 2002, 7 January 2003 and 26 March 2003) the law enforcement authorities refused to initiate criminal proceedings having found no evidence of a homicide. All of these decisions were subsequently annulled by the prosecutors’ office (on |
16 October 2008 | 51. On 6 October 2008 the applicant's counsel applied to the governor of remand prison IZ-77/4 for the applicant's release, claiming that the maximum detention period permitted by domestic law had expired. On |
the previous six months | 11. On 23 September 2004 the Municipal Court ruled partly in favour of the Mayor, without having heard him in person, and, in so doing, ordered the applicant to pay RSD 120,000 in compensation, together with default interest, plus costs in the amount of RSD 33,400. At that time, this was equivalent to approximately 2,... |
20 February 1997 | 12. On 17 March 1997 the Head of the Passports and Visas Service refused the applicant’s request. The entire text of the decision reads as follows:
“As there exist grounds for a temporary restriction on your right to leave the Russian Federation as set out in section 15 of the Law on the procedure for entering and lea... |
29 January 2008 | 11. During the court proceedings the authorities further prolonged the applicant's detention pending trial. The applicant's detention was extended by the Gdańsk Regional Court on 17 May, 25 October 2007 and |
24 December 2003 to 20 February 2004 | 22. Hearings fixed for between 30 June 2003 and 2 October 2003 were cancelled owing to the judge’s involvement in other proceedings. For the same reason, no hearings were held during the periods 21 October 2003 to 13 November 2003 and |
2 February 2006 | 15. On 23 January 2006 the District Court requested the applicant to identify the defendants of his action in accordance with the applicable procedural requirements and the current state of affairs. He responded on |
20 October 2003 | 43. In the detention centre in Volokolamsk the applicant had been placed in cell no. 101, measuring 20 square metres, and allocated for former officials of State law-enforcement agencies. This cell was equipped with a lavatory, a shelf for storing foodstuffs, and a sink with hot and cold running water. During the appl... |
approximately fifty-seven days | 26. In October 2000 the witness and his brother were arrested by gendarmes on their way to work. His brother was released, but the witness was taken to Cizre district gendarmerie station. On the same day the gendarmes searched his home in his presence and made him sign a record. He was then taken to Şırnak gendarmerie... |
12 January 2002 | 15. On the morning of Friday 1 February 2002, a police officer contacted the Autoweek editorial office by telephone, summoning the editors to surrender to the police all photographic materials concerning the street race of |
3 April 2001 | 12. On 26 November 2002 the court found in part for the applicant and ordered the Bailiffs’ Service to pay him UAH 825[3] in compensation for non-pecuniary damage caused as result of the non-enforcement of the judgment of |
30 March 2007 | 24. According to the applicant, the Assize Court essentially ignored the above complaints. According to the Government, the Assize Court examined the applicant’s complaints about meetings with his lawyers and, in particular, on |
2 December 1998 | 14. On 13 June 2001 the Administrative Court rejected the request for an oral hearing. It reasoned:
“The Administrative Court considers that an oral hearing is manifestly unnecessary having regard to the evidence submitted to it and the nature of the case. The case can thus be decided without an oral hearing.”
The cou... |
the last few days of December | 17. In December 2008 the Government decided to celebrate Christmas exclusively on 7 January, according to the old religious calendar, and to have a Christmas tree installed in the central square of Chişinău only in |
14 June 2002 | 14. The applicant instituted proceedings against the President of the Oktyabrskiy District Court and its registry in relation to the failure to examine his above requests for an additional judgment. On |
4 April 2003 | 15. In 2010 S. asked the District Court to provide him with a duplicate of the writ of execution issued following the judgment of 4 April 2003, on the grounds that the original writ of execution had been lost and the judgment of |
the same day | 8. Following the approval of the report on the operational-search activities conducted within the framework of the operational proceedings at issue, on 9 February 2002 in accordance with Section 8 of the Operational-Search Activities Act the Deputy Head of the Barabinsk Town Police decided to carry out a test purchase... |
13 February 2008 | 9. The applicant also complained about the practice of mixing healthy prisoners with those who were infected with transmissible diseases, such as HIV or hepatitis C (HCV). Prisoners were not informed by the authorities about such state of affairs. On one occasion the applicant was told by his fellow cellmate that the ... |
between 30 September 2002 and 23 December 2002 | 16. On 20 August 2002 the court held a hearing and appointed one of its members as judge rapporteur to investigate the case and draft a report. There is no indication that the applicant and/or his legal representative were duly notified of this hearing. The rapporteur held investigatory sittings |
11 May 2005 | 8. In particular, on 12 and 20 April 2005 the applicant was placed in a punishment cell for ten days for refusal to participate in cleaning work in the colony. On 28 April 2005 he spoke rudely to guards and was placed in a punishment cell for three days. On 3 May 2005 the applicant was placed in a punishment cell for ... |
2 July 1998 | 9. Finally, Ms Zehra Delikurt stated that she was not a member of the TKP/ML‑TIKKO-TMLGB. She denied the allegation that she had written slogans in favour of the TKP/ML-TIKKO on the walls of schools in Ankara. When she was shown a photograph in which she was allegedly carrying a picture of the general secretary of the... |
the end of September 1999 | 18. The appeal prosecutor contended that the victim’s family, who had been an injured party to the proceedings, had not been informed about the acquittal proceedings in accordance with Article 137 of the CCP. The appeal prosecutor became aware of the acquittal decision on an unspecified date before |
26 May 1995 | 36. On 11 May 1993 the applicant brought an action for damages in the Bardejov District Court. It was dismissed by the District Court on 20 January 1994 and, on appeal, by the Košice Regional Court on |
three months | 19. On 19 March 2004 the Krtsanisi-Mtatsminda District Court of First Instance in Tbilisi (“the Krtsanisi-Mtatsminda Court”), allowing an application by the GPPO, ordered the applicant’s detention for |
29 March 2005 | 26. The documents submitted by the Government suggest that during the trial in his criminal case, the applicant repeated his complaint of ill‑treatment. Thus, according to the District Court’s ruling of |
1 September 2003 | 9. In the re-examination proceedings, on 4 April 2003 the applicant lodged preliminary written submissions.
A hearing was held on 19 May 2003.
After the hearing, the court decided to deliver a written judgment. The judgment, upholding the applicant's claim in part, was served on the applicant on |
5 October 1995 | 7. As regards the robbery in the village of Vavozh, the conviction was based on testimonies by defendant Sh. and the director general of the company and owner of the warehouse, Mr P., and on written depositions made during the pre-trial investigation by a warehouse guard, Mr M., and Mr O. The statements were as follow... |
24 May 2005 | 14. The Constitutional Court ordered the Supreme Court to reimburse the applicant’s costs in the constitutional proceedings. It dismissed the applicant’s claim for just satisfaction, holding that (i) the finding of a violation of Article 5 § 1 provided appropriate redress for the applicant and (ii) the Supreme Court’s... |
nine years ago | 49. The eighth applicant, Mr Edmundas Svotas, was born on 1 January 1983. He is serving a life sentence at Lukiškės Prison. On 13 April 2010 the Panevėžys Regional Court found the applicant guilty of a number of crimes, including two aggravated murders, six robberies and illegal possession of a firearm. For all the cr... |
29 March 2002 | 60. In so far as the action was directed against the T. hospital, the court held that the applicant had not received a proper diagnosis. Dr G.S., working at the T. hospital, had not referred her for genetic testing, but only to Kraków hospital, even though he had been aware that genetic testing was not carried out the... |
24 October 2001 | 21. The applicant’s lawyer, D., appealed against that decision. In his cassation appeal, he complained, inter alia, of a violation of the applicant’s right to defence and of the use of unlawfully obtained evidence by the court. He submitted that the accusation that the applicant had murdered Mrs K. had been based excl... |
26 April 1995 | 49. On 26 June 1995 the Chief Public Prosecutor of Elbistan sent to the Ministry of Justice’s International Law and Foreign Relations Directorate (hereinafter “the Directorate”) a letter in which reference was made to information sent to the Ministry previously. This letter informed the Directorate of the discovery of... |
11 October 1998 | 7. The Head of the Dzierżoniów District Office was Mr S.L., who was due to stand for election to the district council (rada powiatu) in the local elections scheduled for 11 October 1998. On 21 September 1998 the applicant sent Mr S.L. an open letter calling on him to withdraw from the election. The applicant sent copi... |
4 March 2011 | 41. In the meantime, on 20 June 2011 the third applicant lodged a court action under Article 125 of the CCrP with the Magas District Court. She complained of a lack of investigation into her complaints of |
17 September 2003 | 6. In the meantime, on 24 November 1999, the applicant brought an action before the İzmir Civil Court of General Jurisdiction, asking for compensation in an amount equal to half the value of the flat he and his former wife had bought in 1998. On |
14 June 2005 | 13. On 20 June 2005 the applicant wrote to the Prosecutor General and the Ombudsman complaining, inter alia, of a violation of his right to the presumption of innocence caused by the joint statement of the law‑enforcement authorities of |
24 October 2002 | 19. On 28 October 2002 a judge of the Moscow City Court replied to the applicant's lawyer's complaint of 18 October in a letter stating that the complaint concerning the lawfulness of the applicant's detention should have been submitted to a competent district court. He further said that the complaint did not raise th... |
3 March 2000 | 25. After attempting without success to challenge this refusal by means of an administrative appeal to the Interior Minister, Mrs Shevanova and her son lodged a fresh application with the Riga City Central District Court to have the deportation order set aside. By order of |
between June 2003 and June 2005 | 19. Between March 2002 and April 2006 the applicants requested on numerous occasions to disjoin their claim and the counterclaim as they believed that separately their claim against Y. would be considered quicker. These requests were rejected by the court. The applicants appealed against these decisions although they ... |
three years and twenty-four days | 10. On 20 September 2007 the Bar Association refused the applicant’s request, inter alia, on the grounds that the applicant did not have high moral character (nepriekaištinga reputacija). Given that only |
12 July 2006 | 39. In 2005 the applicant brought civil proceedings, claiming the outstanding amount of his disability pension. By a judgment of 6 May 2006 the Severobaykalsk Town Court of the Buryatiya Republic rejected his claims. On |
19 October 1999 | 130. During questioning on 2 and 3 July 2003 four pilots, Pog., Ab., D. and Sh., who at the material time had been seconded to the Chechen Republic and served in military unit 11731, stated that they had performed a flight in a group of four planes on |
24 August 1990 | 21. On 30 October 1990 the Social Court of Appeal had also instructed a medical expert, Prof. W., to submit a report on the awareness at that time of health risks related to the exposure to asbestos and the existence of any protective measures. On |
21 July 2006 | 32. In the meantime, on 15 February 2005 the first applicant had submitted a new application for a work permit on the ground of family reunification with the second applicant. The Directorate of Immigration rejected his application on |
19 November 2013 | 59. Meanwhile, on 17 May 2013, following the expiry of the maximum period of the applicant’s pre-trial detention, a three-judge panel of the Split County Court exceptionally extended this maximum time-limit for his detention for a further six months, relying on section 35 of the Act on the Office for the Suppression o... |
10 October 2001 | 26. It observed that the notion of defamation in Article 1330 of the Civil Code had to be construed in the light of the criteria established by criminal law. The civil courts were not formally bound by a judgment of the criminal courts. However, it was the Supreme Court’s established case-law that a person convicted o... |
November 2002 | 26. There has been contact between the police and family members, their solicitors or the Centre. In particular, there were meetings on 21 January 2000 with Chief Superintendent McCann; on 19 December 2001 with Detective Inspector Aiken and in |
28 December 1999 | 24. On 10 December 1999 the applicant contested his detention pending trial. The Bucharest County Court ordered his release on 14 December 1999. However, this decision was overturned by the Bucharest Court of Appeal in a final decision of |
28 October 2003 | 55. On 7 July 2005 the Constitutional Court declared the applicant bank’s constitutional complaint inadmissible, finding that the decision complained of was unrelated to the merits of the case.
(b) The proceedings leading to the instruction of |
24 January 2003 | 70. It appears that at least three expert examinations were carried out in the context of the investigation in case no. 916725. The results were reflected in reports dated 15 May and 29 September 2002 and |
between 15 June 1999 and 22 May 2001 | 9. Between 4 February 1999 and 12 April 2001 the applicant lodged five preliminary written submissions and/or adduced evidence.
Between 15 March and 4 May he made three requests that a date be set for a hearing.
Of the four hearings held |
5 November 2001 | 18. On 25 February 2002 the bailiff wrote to the President of the Bucharest Court of Appeal informing him of the difficulties encountered in enforcing the judgment of 24 June 1999 and the decision of the mayor of Bucharest, as Locato and the United States Peace Corps were invoking diplomatic immunity. The letter inclu... |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.