search

… In the determination of his civil rights and obligations ... everyone is entitled to a fair ... hearing ... by an and by .” Article 10 “1.  Everyone has the right to freedom of expression. This right shall include freedom to hold opinions and to receive and impart information and ideas without interference by public authority and regardless of frontiers. ...” …

… In particular, it claimed that it had been deprived of a fair trial on account of the examination of the ownership dispute by judges who had lacked and . It also claimed that the outcome of the ownership dispute – the final judgment on the merits of the case delivered by the Supreme Court on 2 March 2017 – had represented the State’s disguised attempt to limit the television channel. 251.   …

… and by . …

… 2018 to the Council, that procedure, which had been ongoing since March 2014, was still at the preliminary investigation stage and had not been submitted to a Ukrainian court on the substance but at most, only in respect of procedural issues. 84 In that regard, it should be noted that Article 6(1) of the ECHR provides that in the determination of his civil rights and obligations or of any criminal charge against him, everyone is entitled to a fair and public hearing within a reasonable time by an …

… and by . …

… in May 2014 and referred to facts which allegedly occurred in 2010, were still at the pre-trial investigation stage and had been brought before a Ukrainian court for the consideration not of the substance but of, at most, mere procedural questions. 79 In that regard, it should be noted that Article 6(1) ECHR provides that in the determination of his civil rights and obligations or of any criminal charge against him, everyone is entitled to a fair and public hearing within a reasonable time by an …

… The applicant alleged, in particular, that she had not been given a fair hearing by an and by . She also alleged that her telephone communications had been tapped and that she had been subjected to surveillance measures, and that she had had no effective remedies in those respects. 4.  On 18 March 2011 the complaints under Articles 6, 8 and 13 of the Convention were communicated to the Government. 5.   …

… Poland, no. 23614/08, § 54, 30 November 2010), the appeal court’s reply to the matter was limited to merely stating that the Regional Court had had jurisdiction “in view of the of 14 March 2002 and the judicial practice” when upholding its judgment (see paragraph 31 above). 73.  There has therefore been a violation of Article 6 § 1 of the Convention as regards the requirement of an and . 74.   …

… In the determination of his civil rights and obligations or of any criminal charge against him, everyone is entitled to a fair and public hearing ... by an and by .” A.  The parties’ submissions 1.  The Government 46.  The Government submitted that the civil limb of Article 6 of the Convention was inapplicable to the proceedings against the applicant, which had concerned the termination of her judicial office. 47.   …

… In the determination of his civil rights and obligations or of any criminal charge against him, everyone is entitled to a fair and public hearing within a reasonable time by an and by . ... 3.  Everyone charged with a criminal offence has the following minimum rights: ... …

… The relevant part of Article 6 § 1 reads as follows: “In the determination of his civil rights and obligations or of any criminal charge against him, everyone is entitled to a fair and public hearing within a reasonable time by an and by . ...” A.  Admissibility 13.  The Court notes that the complaint under Article 6 is not manifestly ill-founded within the meaning of Article 35 § 3 of the Convention. …

… THE I.  ALLEGED VIOLATION OF ARTICLE 6 § 1 OF THE CONVENTION 12.  The applicant company complained that the quashing of the final judgment given by the Bălţi Court of Appeal on 8 December 2009 had been unjust and had violated Article 6 § 1 of the Convention. …

… It relied on Article 6 § 1 of the Convention, which reads as follows: “In the determination of his civil rights and obligations ... everyone is entitled to a fair ... hearing within a reasonable time by an and by .” A.  Admissibility 1.  The parties’ submissions 54.   …

… The applicant company complained that the domestic courts which had dealt with its case had lacked and that the proceedings concerning the recognition of its claims in the bankruptcy proceedings against Blasco had been unreasonably lengthy. …

… Everyone’s right to life shall be protected by ... ...” Article 3 “No one shall be subjected to torture or to inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.” Article 6 “1.  In the determination of his civil rights and obligations ..., everyone is entitled to a fair ... hearing within a reasonable time by an and by ... ...” Article 8 “1.  Everyone has the right to respect for his private life ... ...” …

… He relied on Article 6 § 1 of the Convention, the relevant part of which reads as follows: “In the determination of his civil rights and obligations or of any criminal charge against him, everyone is entitled to a fair and public hearing within a reasonable time by an and by . ...” A.  Admissibility 15.  The Court notes that this complaint is not manifestly ill-founded within the meaning of Article 35 § 3 (a) of the Convention. …

… The applicant complained that the Supreme Court of Justice’s decision to quash the judgments of the lower courts in his favour, following an appeal on points of lodged by the adverse party out of the legal time‑limit, had breached his right to a fair trial. …

… The applicant also argued that his conviction by the Supreme Court of Justice had not been based on evidence and that the judges had lacked and . Article 6 § 1 of the Convention, in so far as relevant, reads as follows: “In the determination of ... any criminal charge against him, everyone is entitled to a fair ... hearing ... by an and by .” A.  Admissibility 24.   …