FINAL 17/07/2012 This judgment has become final under Article 44 § 2 of the Convention. It may be subject to editorial revision

The second applicant appealed to the High Court, inter alia, on the ground that a sentence of life imprisonment without the possibility of parole amounted to

The CTU acknowledged that his initial conclusions (of July 2008) had to be altered, having regard to the application lodged before the Court by the first applicant; as

The Court notes at the outset that in his observations on the merits of the case the applicant claimed that he had not been able to receive short- term visits from

Following an overall examination of the applicant’s case, the Court concludes that the applicant has failed to adduce evidence capable of demonstrating that there

The Court therefore finds that there has been a violation of Article 8 of the Convention in respect of the two applicants as regards their right to correspondence

raised objections (Vorstellung) to the setting aside of the decision, arguing, inter alia, that the Municipal Council should have obtained data on the noise emissions

The applicant alleged that criminal proceedings against him had been unfair, in breach of Article 6 of the Convention, in that – since he had been prosecuted for, and at

The applicants in the instant case are the father, mother, son and daughter of the late Mr Vitaliy Vulakh, who was allegedly declared guilty after his death