text stringlengths 332 3.61k | label int64 0 12 |
|---|---|
42. The applicant submitted that the prolonged imposition of the dangerous detainee regime on him had been in breach of Article <mask> of the Convention. He referred in particular to the fact that for the whole of the period during which the regime had been imposed on him he had been strip‑searched as a matter of rout... | 5 |
44. The Government stated that the material conditions at the Kumkapı Removal Centre complied with the requirements of Article <mask> of the Convention. They submitted in this respect that the centre had a capacity of 300 persons and that the total number of detainees had not exceeded that number during the applicant’... | 5 |
44. The applicant further complained under Article <mask> of the Convention about the conditions of his pre-trial detention and his alleged infection with tuberculosis, under Article 5 about the unlawfulness of his arrest, his detention pending trial in excess of the time-limit provided in the domestic law, and the fa... | 5 |
84. The applicant complained that during his detention in the Chernoyarskiy District Police Department between 6 and 14 March 2003 the police had subjected him to treatment incompatible with Article <mask> of the Convention and that the authorities had not carried out an effective investigation into the incident. The ... | 5 |
57. The applicant argued that the fact of being treated in a medical institution not legally authorised to provide medical treatment amounted in itself to degrading treatment contrary to Article <mask> of the Convention. In addition, even though the applicant lacked the specialist knowledge to assess the quality of th... | 5 |
115. The applicant maintained that he had been classified as a “dangerous detainee” unlawfully and without any reasonable justification and pointed in this respect to a number of judgments acquitting him of the charges laid against him. The regime had been imposed on him in an arbitrary manner on account of the gravit... | 5 |
48. The Government further stated that the proportion of favourable recommendations issued by OFPRA concerning applications made at border points had been 22.2% in 2005, that is, almost three times the rate of admission for that year under the procedure for claiming eligibility for asylum (8.2%). In their view, this d... | 5 |
2. The applicant Mr Stoica lodged his first complaint at domestic level eleven years after the events took place. On 25 June 2008, more than eighteen years after the events, the applicant lodged his application with the Strasbourg Court. With regard to his application, the Chamber had previously considered that, just ... | 5 |
52. The applicant complained under Article <mask> of the Convention of inhuman and degrading treatment on account of the material conditions of his detention and a lack of adequate medical care. In particular, he complained of overcrowding, poor hygiene, lack of regular access to hot and cold water, and a lack of spec... | 5 |
42. The applicant complained that the conditions of his detention in Łódź Remand Centre where he had been held for a period of over four years had been inadequate taking into account his particular health condition, namely epilepsy and personality disorder. He alleged that the cells had been overcrowded, badly ventila... | 5 |
11. The applicant complained that the conditions of his detention in Ljubljana prison amounted to a violation of Article <mask> of the Convention. In particular, he complained of severe overcrowding, which had led to a lack of personal space, poor sanitary conditions and inadequate ventilation, as well as excessive re... | 5 |
192. The Government submitted, in relation to the applicants’ prison regime, that the “special regime” normally applicable to life prisoners – which entailed keeping them permanently under lock and key and their segregation from other prisoners – was not incompatible with Article <mask> of the Convention. It was requi... | 5 |
110. The Government observed that the right to an effective domestic remedy was a procedural right which had to be linked to a possible violation of a substantive right under the Convention or the Protocols thereto. In paragraph 15 of its admissibility decision of 7 July 2015 the Court had found that “in the absence o... | 5 |
34. The applicant complained that, a minor at the time, he had suffered serious bodily harm and great mental suffering at the hands of the police on 5 August 2001. He also complained that the investigative and prosecuting authorities had failed to carry out a prompt, comprehensive and effective investigation capable o... | 5 |
74. The Government acknowledged that there had been overcrowding in all of the detention facilities in which the applicant had been held. More specifically, the statistics provided by the Government in reply to the applicant’s allegations of overcrowding show that most of the time the applicant’s personal space was si... | 5 |
131. The Government further stated that one of the reasons which had to a large extent contributed to the appearance of new illnesses had been the psychological and emotional burden to which the applicant had been subjected as the result of having been in detention and the criminal proceedings against him. Hence, the ... | 5 |
98. The applicant submitted that he had been kept in conditions that were contrary to Article <mask> of the Convention. In particular he was in a de facto isolation regime, which had not been ordered by a judge and which had gone beyond the maximum duration of ten days prescribed by law. He noted that at the time of t... | 5 |
50. The applicants submitted that any attempt to seek the imposition of criminal or disciplinary sanctions on the police officers who had carried out the searches and seizures and arrested the first applicant would have failed. Internal police investigations were normally entrusted to colleagues of those involved, and... | 5 |
50. The applicant complained under Article <mask> of the Convention of inadequate conditions of detention in Dobrowo and Koszalin Remand Centres. In particular, he submitted that for 309 days his cells had been so severely overcrowded that each prisoner had only 60 square cm of personal space. As a result, the applica... | 5 |
64. The Government commented on the conditions of the applicant’s detention. In particular, they submitted that, in violation of the domestic requirements, the applicant had usually been afforded less than four square metres of personal space during his detention in the unit. At the same time the Government, citing th... | 5 |
57. The applicant, first, complained under Article <mask> of the Convention that she had been subjected to torture and inhuman treatment during her detention. In this respect the applicant stated, particularly, that she had been threatened with death, kept standing for long periods of time and blindfolded. She further... | 5 |
149. The applicant requested the Court to go beyond its findings in N. v. the United Kingdom and to define, in the light of these considerations, a realistic threshold of severity that was no longer confined to securing a “right to die with dignity”. He relied in that connection on the recent developments in the case-... | 5 |
90. The applicant further relied on Article <mask> of the Convention, submitting that her husband had most likely been tortured during his detention and that no effective investigation had been carried out on that account. The applicant also claimed that as a result of her husband’s disappearance and the State’s failu... | 5 |
40. The applicant also complained of a violation of Article <mask> of the Convention, alleging that he had been tortured by the police during his detention and that his allegations of torture had not been duly examined, that the authorities had not provided him with adequate medical assistance, and that the conditions... | 5 |
45. The Government asserted that the conditions of the applicant’s detention in remand prison no. IZ-66/1 from 15 March to 3 August 2005 had been in compliance Article <mask> of the Convention. The applicant had not been confined to the cell all the time. It had been open to him to meet with his lawyer and/or family. ... | 5 |
116. The Government also noted that according to the experts the applicant had had a transitory psychotic disorder from 8 May 2003 until 26 June 2003 (see paragraph 18 above), and it was not for the Court to substitute its own assessment of the facts (the Government relied on Elsholz v. Germany [GC], no. 25735/94, § 6... | 5 |
37. The applicant also submitted that the investigations into his allegations of ill-treatment had been manifestly incompatible with the procedural requirements of Article <mask> of the Convention. While it was for the State to provide a plausible explanation as to the cause of his injuries and to prove that any recou... | 5 |
49. The Government maintained that the applicant's allegations of being beaten by the tax police officer had not been supported by any appropriate evidence and that, although the applicant had indeed sustained physical injuries it was impossible to conclude “beyond reasonable doubt” that they had been inflicted by S. ... | 5 |
264. The Government contested the applicants’ claims. They alleged, in particular, that the applicants’ mental sufferings had not reached the minimum level of severity required for them to fall within the scope of Article <mask> of the Convention, particularly on account of the minor age of certain of the applicants, ... | 5 |
143. The applicant complained that the conditions of her pre-trial detention, including a refusal of medical examination and lack of medical assistance, had amounted to inhuman and degrading treatment contrary to Article <mask> of the Convention. In her observations of 7 May 2005 the applicant further complained under... | 5 |
102. The Government contested the allegations and argued that the investigation had not established that the applicants and Rizvan Ibragimov had been subjected to inhuman or degrading treatment prohibited by Article <mask> of the Convention. As to the level of suffering allegedly caused to the applicants by the fact o... | 5 |
49. The applicants alleged that they were the victims of inhuman and degrading treatment by M. F. and police officers. In particular, they referred to Article 29 of the Constitution and the Law of Ukraine “On Psychiatric Assistance” and maintained that in order to be lawful, a forced psychiatric intervention, in parti... | 5 |
47. The Government maintained that the applicant had not been subjected to treatment contrary to Article <mask> of the Convention. They submitted that the applicant “took an active part in a struggle with the police officers.” Even if he had been intoxicated, he should have been aware of the risk of sustaining injurie... | 5 |
48. The applicant submitted that the cells had been severely overcrowded and that the St Petersburg prosecutor had acknowledged the problem of overcrowding. Inmates had less than two square metres of personal space at their disposal, which indicated a violation of Article <mask> of the Convention. In addition, the app... | 5 |
31. The Government further stated that on most occasions the experts of the Ministry of Health had established no deviations of the sanitary and catering conditions from the relevant domestic requirements. In particular, toilets and bath facilities had been adequate. In this respect the general detention conditions in... | 5 |
56. The applicant alleged that his pre-trial detention had been prolonged excessively by the authorities’ passivity in the face of his requests for its revocation for medical reasons and in spite of the seriousness of his medical condition established by medical documents. The applicant further submitted that this sit... | 5 |
32. The Government submitted that the medical records drawn up on 11 and 14 July 2003, by which the applicant’s injuries had been recorded, entirely refuted the applicant’s version of events. They stressed that the use of a rubber truncheon in the applicant’s case had been lawful and justified. It therefore did not fa... | 5 |
58. The Government accepted that the applicants had suffered physical harm at the hands of the police, but argued that the injuries had not reached a level of severity sufficient to bring them within the scope of Article <mask> of the Convention. Moreover, they pointed out that the use of force had been justified and ... | 5 |
72. The applicants complained under Article <mask> of the Convention that they had been humiliated, intimidated and pressurised by the investigator. They further complained that they had been transported in inhuman conditions on 26 December 2002. In addition, the first applicant complained of the degrading conditions ... | 5 |
215. The Government set out in some detail their assertions about the conditions of the applicants’ detention in the various correctional facilities in which they had been and were being held (see paragraphs 12, 13, 16, 37‑42, 50, 52, 54, 55 and 57-60 above). Based on these assertions, they argued that, although the c... | 5 |
36. The Government further maintained that the applicant’s complaint of ill-treatment before the above-mentioned domestic authorities and the Court had been too vague. He had provided no description or details of the means of ill-treatment, nor was the complaint supported by any evidence. They emphasised that during t... | 5 |
52. The Government pointed out that the applicant had had the right to receive a visit from a family member or a phone call once a week. Moreover he had had the right to participate in educational and religious meetings and to practice sport. He had had access to press, radio and television and to a library. He had hi... | 5 |
134. The applicant in application no. 5402/07 (Mr Gorbunov) complained that the conditions of his detention and transport in the period from 14 September 2006 to 12 January 2007 had been inhuman and degrading in breach of Article <mask> of the Convention, and that he had been absent from the remand hearing of 5 July 2... | 5 |
78. The applicant complained that he had been held in detention and in particular in the isolation cell in the Temporary Investigative Isolation Unit of Kyiv Region (SIZO No. 1 of the Kyiv Region) despite the fact that he had been suffering from a number of chronic diseases. The applicant also maintained that he had b... | 5 |
24. The Government did not dispute that the applicant had been detained pending investigation and trial at the police station in a cell designed only for short-term detention. Nor did they challenge the applicant's account of the conditions of his detention. They also conceded that those conditions had fallen short of... | 5 |
72. The Government further contended that there was no reason to believe that the first applicant and his family would find themselves in a particularly vulnerable situation upon returning to Baghdad. The Government agreed with the Chamber that there was insufficient evidence to conclude that, owing to their personal ... | 5 |
95. The Government submitted that the applicant had failed to exhaust domestic remedies in respect of his complaint under Article <mask> of the Convention, because he had not brought a claim for damages under section 1 of the 1988 Act. One of his co‑accused had brought such a claim in relation to a beating by officers... | 5 |
69. The Government further argued that Article 2 of the Code of Administrative Justice made it possible to challenge before the courts any possible decision on the applicants’ extradition and to raise allegations of a risk of being subjected to the treatment contrary to Article <mask> of the Convention in case of extr... | 5 |
71. The applicant’s condition was, throughout his detention, monitored by the prison health service and he received appropriate medical treatment. There is no indication of any negligence on the part of the medical services, nor has the applicant adduced any evidence to show that the authorities were negligent in admi... | 5 |
44. The Government contested the applicant’s allegation. They submitted that since 2010 he had been subjected to paraclinical tests, including X-ray examinations of his knees. He had always been provided with effective in-patient and out-patient medical care. They insisted that the first-stage osteoarthrosis of the kn... | 5 |
40. The applicant complained that, owing to his Uzbek ethnic origin, he would face a serious risk of ill-treatment if expelled to Kyrgyzstan. In his application form he relied on Article <mask> of the Convention. In his observations on the admissibility and merits of the application of 28 August 2015, the applicant ra... | 5 |
144. The applicant also complained under Article <mask> of the Convention about the allegedly appalling conditions of her detention from 7 to 14 June 2005 (see paragraph 46 above). The Court notes that the complaint was first raised in substance before it on 22 December 2005. Assuming, in the applicant’s favour, that ... | 5 |
87. The Government argued that the applicant’s complaint was manifestly ill-founded, being linked to the manifestly ill-founded complaint under Article <mask> of the Convention. In any event, it had been open to the applicant to lodge a tort action with the Yakutsk Town Court and he had explored that avenue. The fact ... | 5 |
12. The applicant alleges that since he has been active organising demonstrations, detained and tortured, been abroad for a long time and received summonses he would be of interest to the Iranian authorities if he were to be returned to Iran today, 7 years later, and as a consequence would run a real risk of being subj... | 5 |
34. The Government submitted at the outset that the applicant had failed to exhaust domestic remedies. The Cypriot legal system provided a variety of remedies for allegations of violations of Article <mask> of the Convention by detainees which, in line with the Court’s case-law, were both preventive and compensatory i... | 5 |
29. The Government contested that argument. Referring to the certificates prepared by the administration of the remand prison and extracts from the remand prison’s population register, they submitted that the conditions of the applicant’s detention had been in compliance with the requirements of Article <mask> of the ... | 5 |
27. The Government contested that argument. They noted discrepancies between the applicant’s account of the alleged ill-treatment and the medical evidence, which had only confirmed the bruising on the applicant’s forehead but had recorded no injuries to the applicant’s chest or abdomen. They therefore considered that ... | 5 |
39. The applicant argued that he could not have caused himself the injuries in question by rubbing his buttocks against the walls of the exercise yard. Rubbing would only have left scratches, not multiple haematomas. The haematomas could only have originated from the impact of a blunt object, such as, in his case, the... | 5 |
12. The applicant complained that the conditions of his detention in Ljubljana prison amounted to a violation of Article <mask> of the Convention. In particular, he complained of severe overcrowding which had led to a lack of personal space, poor sanitary conditions and inadequate ventilation, as well as excessive res... | 5 |
31. The applicant claimed, and it was also confirmed during an official inquiry by the region prosecutor's office (see paragraph 13 above), that at the material time the cells of the Kopeysk IVS had been overcrowded beyond their design capacity. The Government did not dispute this allegation, referring to the fact tha... | 5 |
149. The applicant submitted that he had testified before the investigator, the prosecutor and the courts on numerous occasions about his ill-treatment, but there had been absolutely no response and no one had been held accountable. In general, not a single police officer or member of the special forces had been held ... | 5 |
92. The Government disagreed with these allegations and argued that the investigation had not established that Mr Sharani Askharov had been subjected to inhuman or degrading treatment prohibited by Article <mask> of the Convention. The Government accepted that the applicant must have suffered as a result of her husban... | 5 |
123. The applicants complained that the conditions of their transportation to and from their court hearings and the treatment to which they had been subjected on the days of the hearings had been inhuman and degrading. They also complained that they had been kept in a glass dock in the courtroom under heavy security a... | 5 |
54. The applicant complained about the conditions of his detention in remand prison no. IZ-64/1 in Saratov and the temporary detention centre in Volsk from 15 June to 17 August 2007. He also complained about the conditions in which he was transported between the remand prison and temporary detention centre. He referre... | 5 |
27. The Government submitted that the applicant’s allegations that he risked ill-treatment in the event of his extradition to Uzbekistan had been considered by the national authorities and dismissed on sufficient grounds. Referring to the decisions of the prosecution and immigration authorities and the domestic courts... | 5 |
50. The applicant complained with reference to the events of 8 December 2001 that she had been violently thrown to the floor and dragged out of her apartment and down a staircase by a police officer and that the authorities had failed properly to investigate the incident. The Court will examine these grievances under ... | 5 |
21. The applicant complained that the conditions of detention under the “KBK” regime – to which he was subjected for about two years – amounted to inhuman and degrading treatment on account of the almost total isolation and absence of human contacts as well as the ubiquitous application of means of restraint. He relie... | 5 |
49. The Government argued, firstly, that the applicant had failed to exhaust domestic remedies in respect of his complaint. They further conceded that the conditions of his detention in the Berdsk IVS had fallen short of the Council of Europe’s standards. In particular, the cells had had no windows, tables or chairs, ... | 5 |
80. The applicants also complained that they endured a terrifying experience when several heavily armed and masked police officers entered their apartment, pointed guns at them and shouted death threats. The Court considers that the psychological ordeal to which the applicants were allegedly subjected, and having rega... | 5 |
50. The applicant complained that he had been kept in wretched conditions in prison which had been overcrowded. He had also been kept in solitary confinement and had had no means of communication with the outside world. On 8 May 2007 special police forces had carried out an operation in the prison and had allegedly il... | 5 |
65. The applicant complained about his ill-treatment while remanded in custody. In particular, he complained that the authorities had failed to provide proper and necessary medical treatment and assistance to him between 30 November 1998 and 8 June 2000. He alleged that the poor conditions of his detention had caused ... | 5 |
43. The applicant initially complained that his removal to Afghanistan would violate his rights under Article <mask> of the Convention. In his submissions of 26 November 2013 (see paragraph 5 above), he further complained that his wife and their four children would also be exposed in Afghanistan to a real risk of trea... | 5 |
39. The applicant complained, under Articles 2 and 3 of the Convention, that he had been ill-treated by the police. Since the applicant's life does not appear to be, or to have been, imperilled, the Court considers that Article 2 is inapplicable in the present case. It will examine the complaint from the standpoint of... | 5 |
61. The applicant complained under Article <mask> of the Convention that (a) he had been ill-treated by police during his arrest on 12 May 2005 and the authorities had failed to investigate the incident, (b) he had been held in overcrowded cells in Tbilisi Prisons Nos. 5 and 7 and (c) there had not been adequate medic... | 5 |
114. The applicants complained that the State authorities had failed to investigate effectively their allegations of indecent sexual acts perpetrated against them by a sports coach from a State sports school, in breach of Article <mask> of the Convention. By doing so, the State had failed to exercise its positive obli... | 5 |
56. The applicant also complained under Article <mask> of the Convention about the conditions of her detention in the remand centre, the conditions of her transport between the remand centre and the courthouse, and the conditions of confinement at the courthouse during the trial. She also alleged that she had been bea... | 5 |
88. The Government reiterated their account of the detention conditions at the Istanbul Atatürk Airport detention facility (see paragraphs 32-34 above) and maintained that those conditions complied with the requirements of Article <mask> of the Convention. They provided one photograph of the room where the applicant h... | 5 |
137. The applicant submits that the armed attack by village guards and gendarmes on him, his family, his house and hamlet and the experience of being forced to flee for their lives amounted to inhuman and degrading treatment or punishment under Article <mask> of the Convention. He refers inter alia to the deliberate, ... | 5 |
38. The Government further pointed out that the applicant did not complain about the alleged ill-treatment for several months, and when he did, an inquiry was conducted that found no proof of police violence. They further stated that the injuries in question were so minor that they were not capable of proving any ill-... | 5 |
122. The Government also submitted global arguments as regards the overall period of the applicant's detention. They argued that the conditions of the applicant's detention had not amounted to inhuman treatment within the meaning of Article <mask> of the Convention. They maintained that he had had adequate cell space ... | 5 |
47. The applicant complained under Articles 6 § 1 and 13 of the Convention that the proceedings in the criminal case, which had involved the determination of his civil claim, had been excessively lengthy and that he had not had an effective remedy in respect of his complaint under Article <mask> of the Convention abou... | 5 |
45. The applicant maintained that the overcrowding and insanitary conditions which had been present during his long years of incarceration had had an adverse effect on his physical health and had caused him humiliation and suffering. The applicant submitted that the conditions of his detention had fallen short of stan... | 5 |
31. The applicant further complained under Article <mask> of the Convention on account of the excessive length of the reinstatement proceedings. She also alleged a violation of Articles 6 § 1 and 13 of the Convention in respect of the courts’ assessment of evidence and interpretation of the national law and challenged... | 5 |
72. The Government acknowledged that the conditions of the applicant’s detention in the temporary detention centre had been unacceptable by Article 3 standards. The Court takes note of the Government’s admission and sees no reason to hold otherwise. Accordingly, the Court concludes that the conditions of the applicant... | 5 |
168. The applicant further complained under Article <mask> of the Convention, as well as with reference to Article 13, that the domestic authorities had not given due attention to his various complaints. He next complained that the court rulings of 27 April and 7 July 2004 had been contrary to the requirements of Arti... | 5 |
113. The applicants submitted that they had been victims of treatment prohibited by Article <mask> of the Convention and had lacked an effective domestic remedy as required under Article 13. They pointed out that after the Supreme Court had upheld the normative framework as being compatible with the Convention (see pa... | 5 |
49. The Government asserted that the conditions of the applicant’s stay in the IK-9 facility, including the living space per inmate, lighting, heating, ventilation, sanitary facilities and food standards were “generally in compliance” with the requirements of domestic law and of Article <mask> of the Convention. The a... | 5 |
39. The Government refuted the allegations. They submitted that the applicant had failed to substantiate them or introduce any evidence in support of his claims that he had been subjected to treatment contrary to Article <mask> of the Convention. The Government further stated that the applicant had been examined by a ... | 5 |
23. The Government further requested the Court to declare the complaints under Article <mask> of the Convention inadmissible for failure to exhaust domestic remedies. They submitted that the applicant could have lodged a complaint against the police officers allegedly involved to their superiors within the Ministry of... | 5 |
129. The applicant – who did not initially have the assistance of a lawyer – originally alleged violations of Articles 3, 5, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 19 and 25 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. In his observations in reply to those of the Government, he withdrew all complaints other than those relating to Article... | 5 |
76. The Government submitted, by way of preliminary objection, that a claim under section 1(1) of the 1988 Act was an effective remedy at the applicant’s disposal. In any event, the applicant’s suffering had not reached the minimum level of severity triggering the application of Article <mask> of the Convention as it ... | 5 |
34. The applicant complained under Article <mask> of the Convention that he had been subjected to ill-treatment by police officers and that there had been no effective investigation into his complaints. In his complaints concerning the lack of effective investigation the applicant also relied on Article 13 of the Conv... | 5 |
29. The Government submitted that the complaints under Article <mask> of the Convention were premature, as the applicant had not sought monetary compensation for the alleged infection with TB and the subsequent lack of adequate medical treatment for that disease in prison. Referring to a number of court decisions in u... | 5 |
16. The applicant submitted that he had been arrested and detained unlawfully, contrary to Article 5 § 1 of the Convention. He further alleged that, contrary to the provisions of Article <mask> of the Convention, upon his arrest and during his first period of detention he had been ill-treated and infected with HIV. He... | 5 |
67. The applicant disagreed and reiterated his complaints. In particular, he contended that his allegation of having been submitted to treatment incompatible with Article <mask> of the Convention had been credible, inter alia, in view of the fact that he had been detained at the county police station in an irregular f... | 5 |
67. The applicants further complained that the refusal of their petitions was a degrading treatment in itself, that they were treated like criminals following the submission of their petitions, and that they were subjected to pressure and disciplinary punishment, in breach of Article <mask> of the Convention. They fur... | 5 |
60. The applicant complained under Article <mask> of the Convention that he had been tortured in police custody. He also complained, relying on Article 4 of Protocol No. 7, that his sentence had been changed from fifteen years to life imprisonment on the basis of an aggravating circumstance (the repeated offence of ro... | 5 |
46. The applicant asserted that her treatment by the police had attained the minimum level of severity required for it to fall within the scope of Article <mask> of the Convention. In this regard she stated that in addition to the haematomas recorded by the medical expert (see paragraph 12 above), she had suffered fro... | 5 |
47. The Government argued that an effective investigation into the applicant’s allegations of ill-treatment had been conducted by the domestic authorities in that the medical reports, witness statements and statements of the accused had been evaluated during the course of the proceedings against the two police officer... | 5 |
87. The applicant substantiated his complaint with medical documents dated 19 March 2006 which attested to fractures to his eighth and ninth ribs on the left side and abrasions and haematomas on his face, head, chest, back and hips (see paragraphs 30-32 above). The applicant’s claim was therefore shown to be “arguable... | 5 |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.