target stringlengths 11 70 | prompt stringlengths 200 10k |
|---|---|
11 March 2011 | 133. On 9 November 2010 he applied for a permanent residence permit under the amended Legal Status Act. On 10 March 2011 he was granted both ex nunc and ex tunc residence permits. They were delivered to him on |
11 January 2009 | 84. On 29 December 2008 the Town Court declared the investigator’s decision of 11 September 2008 unfounded in view of the incomplete pre‑investigation inquiry, noting the same defects as those highlighted by the Regional Court. The decision came into force on |
30 August 2007 | 28. On 15 October 2007 the applicant received a reply from the President of the Białystok Regional Court to another of her complaints about the guardians' inefficiency. The President considered that some delays had been caused by the father's obstructive attitude but also by a lack of co-operation between the applican... |
3 March 2004 | 73. On 5 April 2004 the Government informed the Court that on 6 January 2004 Captain G., an employee of the Federal Service for Execution of Sentences in the Bashkortostan Republic (“the regional department of the FSES”), had had a “conversation” with the applicant “in order to clarify the circumstances that had given... |
about two years earlier | 36. On 24 October 2011 the Ulugbekskiy District Court of Tashkent questioned X. Assisted by a specialist from the childcare authorities and by her guardian, S., X stated that her grandparents did not prevent her from contacting her father. She had access to the Internet and was present on social networks. She would li... |
the third day | 50. On 7 June 2005 the investigators questioned the applicants' neighbour, Ms Z.N., who stated that at about 7 p.m. on 19 June 2002 she had been at home when she had heard armoured vehicles in the street. She had gone outside and next to the Iriskhanovs' house she had seen three APCs and a group of military servicemen... |
the past century | 14. On 3 August 2000 the Rossiyskaya Gazeta newspaper ran an article on the Unification Church’s activities in southern Russia which – according to the applicant – described in general terms the grounds subsequently endorsed by the Federal Security Service in favour of his expulsion. It was entitled “Caramels from Moo... |
27 September 2000 | 23. At that third hearing, held on 11 March 2003, the applicant called two witnesses with a view to undermining officer N.D.’s credibility. The court acceded to his request over the prosecution’s objection. The first witness said that when investigating a theft of which he had been suspected by officer N.D. of committ... |
the following day | 10. At 12.59 p.m. on 28 December 2004 the same person called Mr A. and told him that he should now add a zero to the amount – meaning that Mr A. would have to pay USD 250,000. Both phone calls were made from the same telephone number, which the applicants noted down. On |
21 June 2000 | 18. On 12 July 1999 the Plovdiv Regional Court quashed the lower court’s judgment, declared the 1968 contract null and void and restored the plaintiffs’ ownership of the first floor and the share in the plot and the yard. By final judgment of the Supreme Court of Cassation of |
25 April 2007 | 8. On 7 December 2006 the applicant appealed against the above judgment. On 21 December 2006 the Court of Appeal requested him to lodge the appeal, by 15 January 2007, in accordance with the procedural formalities. Following that, on |
the same day | 55. On the morning of Friday 11 November 2005 the applicant's lawyer requested the trial court to stay execution of its decision of 10 November 2005 and to prevent the applicant's transfer from the RNC. He submitted a copy of the facsimile from the European Court of Human Rights regarding the interim measure. The Cent... |
20 November 2008 | 16. During the appeal proceedings the applicant requested the Court of Criminal Appeal to refer the case to the constitutional courts on constitutional grounds (different from those raised below). On |
4 April 1994 | 63. On 27 March 1998 a Prosecutor at the Diyarbakır Court sent a letter to the anti-terrorism department of the Diyarbakır Police, requesting that the two police officers, who had questioned Necati Aydın and Mehmet Ay while they were in police custody and had then accompanied them to the Diyarbakır Court on |
28 and 29 January | 68. On 20 March 1996 the investigator conducted a reconstruction of the events during Mr Zabchekov's arrest in order to clarify the witnesses' evidence. Those taking part were Sergeant Mutafov (C), the young man who had been with him on |
23 April 1992 | 32. In a letter of 11 April 1992 directed to the Częstochowa Municipal Department of Architecture and Land Development the applicant’s neighbour, leasing the plot at 28 Wieluńska Street, protested against the preliminary building permission given to the applicant. In reply dated |
sixteen years old | 4. The applicants were born in 1955, 1957, 1977, 1982 and 1989 respectively and live in Van. The first two applicants are the parents and the remaining applicants are the brothers of Mr Şaban Cadıroğlu (Ş.C.), who died in 1999 when he was |
three days later | 15. In response to complaints from the applicant’s relatives, on 1 August 2012 the head of detention facility no. 1 in Rostov sent a letter to the applicant’s mother informing her that a request for admission to tuberculosis hospital no. 1 had been sent by the medical unit of the detention facility. However, |
22 May 1990 | 16. On 28 April 1986 the Government appealed against that judgment. A hearing was held before the Administrative Court of Appeal of the Land North Rhine-Westphalia (Oberverwaltungsgericht für das Land Nordrhein-Westfalen) on |
21 August 2001 | 20. According to a subsequent agreement the term of 29 June 2001 was extended to 21 August 2001. By that date, BRS was aware that the possible claims of AS Valga Külmvagunite Depoo constituted risks that substantially affected the value of ER. In view of that circumstance, on |
26 July 2007 | 31. With assistance from the NGO “Mothers’ Right”, the applicant challenged the decision of 16 July 2007 before a higher authority. The appeal claim was supported by statements made by his fellow serviceman Gal., who in written submissions dated |
seven months | 13. From January 1974 to May 1974 (at which time the applicant was 15 years old), and from October 1974 to January 1975 (when she was 16 years old), the applicant was placed in the children and young people’s psychiatric department at Frankfurt am Main University Clinic for |
eighteen days | 41. Article 16 of the European Convention on Extradition of 13 December 1957 (CETS no. 024), to which Russia is a party, provides as follows:
“1. In case of urgency the competent authorities of the requesting Party may request the provisional arrest of the person sought. The competent authorities of the requested Par... |
28 October 2013 | 20. On 26 September 2013 the Zamoskvoretskiy District Court extended the applicant’s house arrest until 2 January 2014. It referred to the seriousness of the charges and considered that as a human-rights activist the applicant could communicate with different authorities and persons and thus obstruct the course of cri... |
fifteen months | 29. On 26 January 2001 the District Court held a hearing in the presence of the applicant, the child’s father, a representative of the Youth Office, the child S. and the foster parents. All parties to the proceedings agreed that the child should be offered therapy without further delay. During the time of therapy, whi... |
16 May 2006 | 64. On an unspecified date the applicant brought proceedings against the T-2 detention facility, seeking compensation for non-pecuniary damage sustained as a result of the poor conditions of detention. In particular, he complained of stuffiness and unpleasant odour in the cells where he had been kept, lack of proper e... |
Between 25 May and 28 December 2009 | 13. The Government supplied the following details concerning the cells in which the applicant has been detained in Jilava Prison:
- Between 8 April and 24 May 2009 the applicant was detained in cell no. 513, measuring 45.30 sq. m. The cell was occupied by between fourteen and seventeen inmates.
- |
7 November 2012 | 9. The District Court issued further orders extending the applicant’s pre‑trial detention on 2 August, 6 September and 7 November 2012. Each time, it relied on the gravity of the charges and the risk flowing of the applicant absconding, interfering with the course of justice and reoffending. Neither detention order me... |
February 2003 | 8. On 30 June 2003 the Ust-Yanskiy District Court of the Sakha Republic (Yakutiya) allowed the applicant’s action against the Government and awarded him RUB 120,428.80 as the full car value less the amount already paid in |
9 August 2012 | 19. The applicant’s application for release was dismissed by the District Court on 9 July 2012. It reiterated in essence the same reasoning as in its decision of 3 July 2012 without any consideration for the application of a less restrictive measure. On appeal, on |
21 April 2005 | 15. By a decision of 29 June 2005, the Supreme Court dismissed the appeal. It held that the Code of Criminal Procedure did not prevent the decision on extending detention from being made at the time when the case-file was with the appeal court. Referring to its earlier decision of |
20 May 2011 | 7. On the basis of the extensive evidence collected during the preliminary investigation, including through mechanisms of international legal assistance in criminal matters from the authorities in Spain, Slovenia and the Netherlands, and the results of secret surveillance measures, on |
10 May 2003 | 9. By decision no. 394 of 1 July 2005, the Kardzhali District Court imposed an overall prison term of three years and six months. The court found that the applicant had started serving his sentence for case no. 210/00 on |
7 February 2007 | 6. Criminal proceedings were initiated against the applicant; however he was diagnosed with schizotypal personality disorder. On the basis of this diagnosis the Moscow City Court (Московский городской суд) on |
17 April 2002 | 11. In December 2001 the applicant sued the bank for the loss caused by the exchange-rate fluctuations between the day he had accepted the bank’s offer and the day the money had arrived. The bank objected to that claim on the ground that it had extinguished its obligations by repaying the deposit to the applicant. On |
7 November 2005 | 9. In 2004–06 the Town Council several times offered the applicant the voucher. The applicant refused these offers and asked the District Court to change the mode of enforcement to a cash payment, but on |
the same day | 27. On 22 September 2011 the applicant requested release claiming that his state of health was not compatible with detention and that he could not receive appropriate medical treatment in SIZO. The trial court rejected this request |
28 March 2002 | 14. The second applicant walked to the checkpoint located at the entrance to Gudermes where he was detained by servicemen. The latter called the Gudermes district department of the interior (“the Gudermes ROVD”). At about 7 p.m. on 27 March 2002 police officers arrived at the checkpoint and took the applicant to the R... |
13 October 1995 | 85. On 28 February 2001, in the framework of the proceedings thus instigated, the Yalova Criminal Court found the accused guilty as charged. It was satisfied that the Mayor had authorised, under a decision taken by the Municipal Council on |
2004 and 2005 | 21. During his detention in Sokalska Prison between October 2004 and November 2007 the applicant stayed in cells of twelve square metres, together with three other inmates. According to him, as the cells contained sanitary facilities, four bunks, a table and two benches, the applicant and his cellmates had very limite... |
11 April 1995 | 16. The Tervel District Court dismissed the application for judicial review in a judgment of 15 March 1995, holding that there was insufficient evidence that the applicant’s ancestor had owned the land. The applicant was notified of the judgment in writing on |
twenty-four hours | 13. On 23 February 2005 both applicants were examined by a single judge of the District Court in connection with the prosecutor's request. The second applicant was brought before him at approximately 5.15 p.m.. The first applicant was brought before him at approximately 6 p.m.
Assisted by a lawyer of their choosing, w... |
14 November 2005 | 157. On 19 July 2005 the applicants' complaint was forwarded to the Grozny Military Garrison Court. On 6 March 2006 the Garrison Court quashed the decision of 13 March 2002 and sent the investigation back to the military prosecutor's office. By that time, the investigation had already been resumed by a decision of the... |
18 October 2003 | 24. On 17 October 2003 Mr B. Asadbeyli, Mr S. Hamidov, Mr E. Huseynli and Mr H. Mammadov were taken from their homes to the Sumgayit City Prosecutor’s Office for questioning. Several hours later they were allowed to go home but were instructed to come back the next morning. On |
12 June 1991 | 11. In February 1990 the Building Committee decided to postpone its reply to the request until a new detailed development plan for the area had acquired legal force, but only until 13 June 1991. Subsequently, on |
31 May 2010 | 6. The applicant served his prison sentence in the semi-open and closed sections of Ljubljana prison in the period between 21 July 2009 and 24 December 2009. On the latter date he was transferred to Celje prison, where he stayed until his conditional release on |
18 January 2006 | 29. On 15 October 2007 the Chişinău prosecutor’s office again dismissed the applicant’s complaint about his alleged ill-treatment. The prosecutor based his decision on essentially the same reasons as the decision of |
February 1995 | 10. On 8 November 1993 the applicant commenced employment as an administrative assistant at the United States Embassy in London, in the Foreign Broadcasting Information Service, which is a subsidiary of the Central Intelligence Agency. She was dismissed from her employment in |
24 February 2011 | 19. On 13 January 2011 the court held a hearing and decided to appoint a new expert. At that hearing the court also requested the applicant’s representative to inform the court of the applicant’s successors. On |
1991 and 1992 | 6. The applicant, a person of Serbian ethnic origin, lived in the town of Sisak. During 1991 and 1992 Serbian paramilitary forces gained control of about one third of the territory of Croatia and proclaimed the so-called “Serbian Autonomous region of Krajina” (Srpska autonomna oblast Krajina, hereinafter the “Krajina... |
5 April 2005 | 31. At a preliminary hearing on 29 June 2009 the High Court allowed motions by the applicants to separate the murder charges from the sexual offences charges. The first applicant also argued that the murder charge against him should be dismissed for reason of delay. However, the court refused to dismiss the charge, fi... |
24 December 2009 | 53. On 27 January 2010 the head of the Chechen investigation department wrote to the Chechen Minister of the Interior stating, amongst other things:
“... [within the framework of the investigation of criminal case no. 66094], on |
11 July 2006 | 15. The incident report noted that late in the evening of 9 September 2005, at 11.15 p.m., the applicant had insulted N.M. and had threatened him with a small knife. N.M. had subsequently knocked the applicant over so that he had fallen on his head, causing an open wound. He had been taken to the hospital immediately.... |
thirty years | 11. At a hearing on 18 February 2000 before the Rome preliminary hearings judge (giudice dell'udienza preliminare – “the GUP”) the applicant asked to be tried under the summary procedure, a simplified process which entailed a reduction of sentence in the event of conviction. In the version in force at that time Articl... |
20 November 2007 | 12. X testified that Ms A. had repeatedly called him requesting the false sick-leave certificate. He had agreed to help her and had received RUB 500 (EUR 11) from her. He had called several doctors but they had refused to help and he had decided to ask the applicant to issue the certificate. On |
23 March 1999 | 23. On 13 November 2001 proceedings were instituted to determine whether the operation of the workshop was lawful. On the same day the applicant was informed that on 13 December 2001 an inspection of the building would be carried out. On the same day the Supreme Administrative Court dismissed the owner’s appeal agai... |
24 July 2002 | 43. On 11 June 2003 the investigation obtained a conclusion by these two experts, in which they reported of numerous shortcomings in the air show organisation. In addition to the shortcomings pointed in the earlier Special Commission’s report, they concluded that the aerobatics zone was too small; the boundaries of th... |
since August 2012 | 21. Following the interview, the investigator issued a decision charging the applicant under Articles 192.2.2 (illegal entrepreneurship), 213.1 (large‑scale tax evasion) and 308.2 (aggravated abuse of power) of the Criminal Code. The description of charges consisted of a single sentence which was one page long and was... |
between 7 November 2008 and 9 October 2009 | 11. Some of the applicants were successful before the Court of First Instance (Osnovni sud) in Podgorica, while others were not. However, all the applicants were unsuccessful in the second-instance proceedings before the High Court (Viši sud) in Podgorica, which rendered its decisions |
next spring | 61. In an article published in the daily newspaper “Radikal” on 5 December 1996, the journalist İsmet Berkan wrote:
“It all dates back to early 1992. At that time the Turkish Chief of Staff's office made radical changes in its strategy in the fight against the outlawed PKK. The military units, which used to take actio... |
31 October 1996 | 25. On 2 August 1996 the public prosecutor at the İzmir public prosecutor’s office decided not to investigate Mehmet Kurnaz’s allegations of ill‑treatment on the ground that there was already a decision of non‑prosecution against the prison officers in respect of the same event and that the case file against the genda... |
the following day | 52. On 11 June 2013 the applicant’s representative Mr Gladkikh was informed that the applicant would be released on 12 June 2013. However, since it was a public holiday in Russia the release was rescheduled to 9 a.m. |
more than 14 years | 8. On 13 January 2005 the Constitutional Court found that the District Court had violated the applicant's right under 48 § 2 of the Constitution to a hearing without unjustified delay. The overall length of the proceedings ( |
27 February 1996 | 35. She was given three medical examinations:
(a) In a report dated 19 February 1996, a forensic doctor found old bruising to the soles of the feet measuring 5 cm by 4 cm that was in the process of healing, bruising to both palms and pain in the shoulders and arms. He certified her unfit for work for seven days.
(b) ... |
11 June 2009 | 29. On 24 November 2010 the District Court rejected a co-accused’s request for release on the ground that the time-limit for his detention “pending trial” had expired. In interpreting article 263 § 2 (c) of the CCP, the District Court argued that the time-limit had started to run from |
4 October 2005 | 51. In a report of 28 September 2012 addressed to the Government after they had been given notice of the present application, the Granada child protection services summed up the background to the separation and G.'s placement in the children's homes and subsequently in pre-adoption foster care, reiterating the argumen... |
26 September 1999 | 10. On 30 January 2006 the Sisak County Court dismissed the claim on the grounds that it had become time-barred. It held that the applicant had left the town of Sisak of his own free will, that the town of Sisak had never been occupied and that the courts had been operational there at all times. Therefore, there had b... |
Between 26 June 1998 and 31 May 1999 | 10. The applicant appealed. The five hearings held between 22 March 1996 and 29 May 1998 were adjourned on account of the lack of an acknowledgment of receipt in respect of summonses served on the applicant in Canada. |
at least two years’ | 92. Chapter 13 of the CCrP (“Preventive Measures”) governs the use of preventive measures (меры пресечения) while criminal proceedings are pending. Such measures include placement in custody. Custody may be ordered by a court on an application by an investigator or a prosecutor if a person is charged with an offence c... |
28 July 2004 | 13. On 26 September 2000 the applicant instituted proceedings before the Rent Regulation Board (the “RRB”) in order to have a fair amount of rent fixed. On 17 January 2002 these proceedings were adjourned sine die in view of the constitutional proceedings instituted by the applicant, and they have not been resumed sin... |
23 June 2002 | 38. On 2 July 2004 the Moscow Region Deputy Prosecutor decided not to institute criminal proceedings in respect of the alleged ill-treatment of the applicant on 23 June 2002. The order read, in so far as relevant, as follows:
“...[A. N.] Mironov filed a complaint with the Prosecutor's Office of the Moscow Region stati... |
three months | 59. In February 2005 the investigators forwarded requests to the Achkhoy-Martan district prosecutor's office and the Shelkovskoy district prosecutor's office asking the authorities to question the owners of the four vehicles. According to their responses, it was impossible to question Mr I.B. as his whereabouts had no... |
9 August 2011 | 36. On 17 August 2011 the Regional Court again issued decisions requiring H.H., M.M., S.G. and S.K, among others, to appear in court. On 24 August 2011 the Gavar police addressed a similar reply regarding the whereabouts of H.H., M.M. and S.G. Specifically, M.M. was apparently in Russia and S.G. had left for Egypt. Me... |
13 April 2015 | 19. In reply to the above request, a person-specific official report (individueel ambtsbericht) was released on 3 December 2015 by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. The relevant part of the report stated as follows:
“Question 1:
The address ... in Salouin, region of Nador, is [the applicant’s] last known address in Mor... |
25 September 2015 | 19. On 18 August 2015 the Burgas Municipal Ombudsman urged the Minister of Regional Development to halt the demolition on the basis that, although formally lawful, it would have a disproportionate impact on the applicants. In response, on |
16 July 2004 | 14. On 1 December 2003 the Ljubljana Labour and Social Court decided that it did not have jurisdiction in the case and referred it to the Vrhnika Local Court for adjudication. Following an objection by the applicant, the Vrhnika Local Court also declared that it lacked jurisdiction to decide on the matter and referred... |
5 November 1996 | 36. On 17 April 2011 the investigating authority issued a decision suspending the investigation. This decision reads as follows:
“It follows from the evidence in the case file that on 25 April 2006 inhabitants of nearby villages and other people blocked the road with stones and logs ... In reply to lawful orders from ... |
5 September 1999 | 5. On 8 September 1999 at 5.15 a.m. the applicant was arrested by police officers from the anti-terror branch of the Istanbul Security Directorate on suspicion of membership of an illegal organisation, the PKK (the Kurdistan Workers' Party). According to the arrest protocol, the police officers had to use force to app... |
between 1982 and 2007 | 15. The applicant claimed before the court that the phrase used in the interview was an acceptable journalistic summary of A.M.’s opinions and his set of views demonstrated during numerous public appearances. According to the applicant, it was possible to summarise one’s way of thinking. He further confirmed that he w... |
the past fifteen years | 25. According to the applicant, due to the severity of the restrictions on his contacts with the outside world he lost contact with some of his family members and with his own son, whom he had not seen for |
24 August 2004 | 76. On 8 September 2004 the Supreme Court of the Chechen Republic dismissed the applicant’s appeal and upheld the first-instance decision on appeal. It noted in particular that the involvement of federal servicemen in the detention and subsequent disappearance of Isa Kaplanov and Ruslan Sadulayev had been established ... |
27 April 2009 | 24. In the beginning of 2009 the applicant’s leg swelled again. On 28 March 2009 he was admitted to the new wing of the prison hospital where the conditions were, according to the applicant, satisfactory. His treatment in the hospital continued until |
11 February | 45. On 16 April 2007 the housing authorities rejected for a third time the restitution claim pursuant to section 3a. That decision was upheld by the competent Cantonal Ministry and the Mostar Cantonal Court on |
4/5 September 1995 | 23. On 20 April 2006 the ad hoc commission adopted a report. Having interviewed numerous people, it established that Mr Palić had been captured by the VRS forces (that is, by Mr Radomir Furtula of the Rogatica Brigade) and handed over to Mr Zdravko Tolimir, Assistant Commander for Intelligence and Security of the Main... |
31 October 2002 | 30. The Government claimed that the applicant used to participate in entertainment and sport activities. However, on the ground that the applicant refused to take the daily walk and to participate in recreation activities, he was sanctioned with a reprimand on |
21 December 1999 | 13. On 27 November 2006 the Supreme Court of Justice upheld I.A.’s and S.A.’s revision request. As a result, the judgment of the Chişinău Regional Court of 27 September 1999 was quashed while the judgment of the Court of Appeal of |
14 December 1999 | 16. On 6 May 1999, in reply to a letter from the applicant's lawyer, the registry of the Brussels Court of Appeal stated that the case had been set down for hearing and would take approximately eight months to come to a hearing. On |
21 June 2011 | 13. On 26 May 2011 the Court of First Instance in Podgorica declared that it lacked competence to deal with the first applicant’s claim and rejected it (tužba [se] odbacuje), which decision was upheld by the High Court on |
2 July 2001 | 50. On 8 December 2000 the proceedings were stayed once again, because one of the applicant’s co-accused, who had also been taken to the house in Koprivshtitsa, had left the country and could not be interviewed as a witness. They were resumed on |
10 December 2002 | 39. At a hearing on 4 February 2003 the applicants were again requested to specify their civil action and to provide evidence as to the legal connection between the defendants against which they had initially lodged their civil action and the defendants indicated in their specified civil action of |
20 April 2005 | 37. On 30 March 2007, after hearing the applicant and I.V. and relying on experts’ opinions, the court issued a decision rejecting the applicant’s request for an interim measure. It stated that contact was regulated by the interim measure of |
from January until February 2013 | 10. In his reply of 3 July 2013 to the Government’s observations, the applicant contested the relevance and accuracy of the evidence provided by them. He submitted, inter alia, that he had also been held in cell no. 6 together with another prisoner. He provided no information as regards the period of his detention the... |
15 November 1996 | 25. On 8 August 1996 the applicant lodged another motion with the District Court, asking again for the appointment of a guardian to represent the child for the purpose of instituting paternity proceedings. By a decision of |
March 2007 – April 2013 | 39. The latter judgments, delivered by the House of Lords on 11 March 2004 and 28 March 2007 respectively, confirmed that Article 2 did not apply to cases where the deaths in question pre-dated the Act.
(e) |
10 June 2005 | 37. The applicant complained about the delay in the enforcement proceedings to: i) the President of the Municipal Court on 29 November 2005, 20 February 2006 and 3 May 2006; ii) the President of the District Court on |
August 2008 | 29. It appears from the Government’s submissions that on many occasions the public prosecution office, having conducted relevant enquiries, declared unsubstantiated the applicant’s complaints about alleged interferences with his correspondence. The one exception pertained to one instance of interference in |
23 March 1996 | 172. The witness denied the applicant's allegation that he had left the island two days before the killing of Mr Adalı, namely on 4 July 1996. He stressed that he had left the island in the second week of August 1996 subsequent to the end of his term of office. When asked about the allegations made by Mr Adalı, in his... |
2 February 2001 | 19. On 21 February 2002, while the applicant was in detention on remand on the charges of participation in a criminal organisation and international narcotics trafficking (see paragraph 12 above), the Milan public prosecutor’s office asked the Italian Ministry of Justice to request the Albanian authorities to validate... |
the period between 1 March 1991 and 1 October 1997 | 16. In the resumed proceedings concerning the salary arrears (see paragraph 8 above), by a judgment of 28 April 2004 the Vukovar Municipal Court found for the applicant and ordered the defendant to pay him salary arrears for |
October and November 2000 | 9. An investigator interviewed Mr B. and Mr V. who were drug addicts and were suffering from drug withdrawal syndrome. They confessed to robbery, committed with the applicant. According to the applicant, they had confessed because policemen had promised to supply them with drugs. The applicant insisted that in |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.