{"id":18213,"date":"2022-03-15T09:19:28","date_gmt":"2022-03-15T09:19:28","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/laweuro.com\/?p=18213"},"modified":"2022-03-15T09:19:28","modified_gmt":"2022-03-15T09:19:28","slug":"case-of-tetik-and-others-v-turkey-european-court-of-human-rights-25885-19-and-37-others","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/laweuro.com\/?p=18213","title":{"rendered":"CASE OF TETIK AND OTHERS v. TURKEY (European Court of Human Rights) 25885\/19 and 37 others"},"content":{"rendered":"

The applications concern the non-enforcement of domestic courts\u2019 decisions despite the Compensation Commission\u2019s findings of breach of the applicants\u2019 right to a fair trial.<\/p>\n

\n

SECOND SECTION
\nCASE OF TET\u0130K AND OTHERS v. TURKEY<\/strong>
\n(Applications nos. 25885\/19 and 37 others)<\/em>
\nJUDGMENT
\nSTRASBOURG
\n15 March 2022<\/p>\n

This judgment is final but it may be subject to editorial revision.<\/p>\n

In the case of Tetik and Others v. Turkey,<\/strong><\/p>\n

The European Court of Human Rights (Second Section), sitting as a Committee composed of:<\/p>\n

Egidijus K\u016bris, President,
\nPauliine Koskelo,
\nGilberto Felici, judges,
\nand Hasan Bak\u0131rc\u0131, Deputy Section Registrar,<\/p>\n

Having regard to:<\/p>\n

the applications against the Republic of Turkey lodged with the Court under Article 34 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (\u201cthe Convention\u201d) by the applicants listed in the appended table, (\u201cthe applicants\u201d), on the various dates indicated therein;<\/p>\n

the decision to give notice of the applications to the Turkish Government (\u201cthe Government\u201d) represented by Mr Hac\u0131 Ali A\u00e7\u0131kg\u00fcl, Head the Human Rights Department of the Ministry of Justice, co-Agent of the Republic of Turkey before the European Court of Human Rights;<\/p>\n

the parties\u2019 observations;<\/p>\n

the decision to reject the Government\u2019s objection to the examination of the applications by a Committee;<\/p>\n

Having deliberated in private on 22 February 2022,<\/p>\n

Delivers the following judgment, which was adopted on that date:<\/p>\n

SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE<\/strong><\/p>\n

1. The applications concern the non-enforcement of domestic courts\u2019 decisions despite the Compensation Commission\u2019s findings of breach of the applicants\u2019 right to a fair trial.<\/p>\n

2. In 2008, 2009 and 2010 the applicants were awarded compensation for their receivables arising from labour agreements with the Y\u00fcksekova Municipality (\u201cthe Municipality\u201d) in three sets of civil proceedings before the Y\u00fcksekova Civil Court of First Instance. The details of the proceedings are set out in Appendix\u00a02.<\/p>\n

3. The compensation amounts awarded by the Y\u00fcksekova Civil Court of First Instance to the applicants were not paid except for the compensation awarded in the first set of proceedings brought by the applicants in application no.\u00a026026\/19.<\/p>\n

4. On different dates in 2011, 2012 and 2013 the applicants applied to the Court complaining of the non-enforcement of domestic judicial decisions in their favour.<\/p>\n

5. In 2013 the Court held that their applications were inadmissible for non-exhaustion of domestic remedies due to the applicants\u2019 failure to exhaust the Compensation Commission, domestic remedy established under Law no.\u00a06384 which provides redress for complaints concerning, inter alia, non\u2011enforcement of domestic remedies.<\/p>\n

6. In 2014, the Compensation Commission awarded to the applicants non\u2011pecuniary damage for the excessive length of proceedings. It further transmitted its decision to the Municipality, requesting it to execute the judicial decisions in question.<\/p>\n

7. In the same year, the applicants also applied to the Constitutional Court complaining about the Municipality\u2019s failure to enforce the relevant judicial decisions despite the decision of the Compensation Commission.<\/p>\n

8. In July 2018, as the applications were pending before the Constitutional Court, a provision empowering the Compensation Commission established under Law no. 6384 to deal with the applications pending before the Constitutional Court, concerning, inter alia, non-enforcement complaints were added to Law no.\u00a06384.<\/p>\n

9. In the same year the Constitutional Court found the applicants\u2019 applications inadmissible for non-exhaustion of domestic remedies, namely the Compensation Commission.<\/p>\n

10. On unspecified dates, some minor parts of the receivables were paid to some of the applicants.<\/p>\n

THE COURT\u2019S ASSESSMENT<\/strong><\/p>\n

I. JOINDER OF THE APPLICATIONS<\/p>\n

11. Having regard to the similar subject matter of the applications, the Court finds it appropriate to examine them jointly in a single judgment.<\/p>\n

II. ALLEGED VIOLATION OF ARTICLE\u00a06 \u00a7 1 OF THE CONVENTION AND OF ARTICLE\u00a01 OF PROTOCOL No.\u00a01 OF THE CONVENTION<\/p>\n

12. The applicants complain of the non-enforcement of domestic decisions given in their favour. They rely expressly or in substance, on Article\u00a06 \u00a7 1 of the Convention and on Article\u00a01 of Protocol No.\u00a01 to the Convention.<\/p>\n

13. The Government firstly argued that because some of the compensation amounts were partially paid to them, the applicants lost their victim status, at the very least in respect of the portions paid.<\/p>\n

14. The Government secondly claimed that the applications were abusive on account of the failure of the applicants to inform the Court of the said partial payments made by the domestic authorities.<\/p>\n

15. The Government thirdly maintained that the applications had been inadmissible for non-exhaustion of domestic remedies because the applicants failed to apply to the Compensation Commission, established by Law no.\u00a06384, after the Constitutional Court had found their applications inadmissible for non-exhaustion of domestic remedies.<\/p>\n

16. The Court observes that the applicants had already applied to the Compensation Commission before lodging their applications with the Constitutional Court. However, despite the Compensation Commission\u2019s findings, the decisions of the Y\u00fcksekova Civil Court of First Instance awarding the applicants compensation had still not been fully enforced.<\/p>\n

17. Having examined all the material submitted to it and considering its case-law (see Hornsby v. Greece, no. 18357\/91, Reports of Judgments and Decisions 1997\u2011II), the Court considers that the applications are not inadmissible on any grounds and that the authorities did not deploy all necessary efforts to enforce fully and in due time the decisions in the applicants\u2019 favour.<\/p>\n

18. There has therefore been a breach of Article 6 \u00a7 1 of the Convention and Article 1 of Protocol No.\u00a01 to the Convention.<\/p>\n

APPLICATION OF ARTICLE 41 OF THE CONVENTION<\/strong><\/p>\n

19. Each of the applicants claimed 200,000 euros (EUR), in respect of pecuniary damage, corresponding to the potential financial benefits they had been deprived of on account of the non-payment of the amounts awarded by the domestic courts.<\/p>\n

20. As regards non-pecuniary damage, each applicant claimed that he had suffered distress and hardship on account of the non-payment of the domestic judgment debts and requested EUR 50,000.<\/p>\n

21. The applicants further claimed EUR 500,000 in respect of costs and expenses.<\/p>\n

22. The Government requested the Court not to rule on just satisfaction because the Compensation Commission was now entitled to examine just satisfaction claims in applications where the Court has found a violation of Article\u00a01 of Protocol No. 1 to the Convention but has not ruled on the applicants\u2019 claims for just satisfaction under Article 41 of the Convention or has decided to reserve the question (Kaynar and Others v.\u00a0Turkey, nos.\u00a021104\/06 and 2 others, \u00a7 64-78, 7 May 2019).<\/p>\n

23. The Court considers that the respondent Government should ensure that the domestic judgments in the appended table, are executed by the administration in full by closing the enforcement proceedings at the bailiff`s offices (\u0130cra M\u00fcd\u00fcrl\u00fckleri) which had been initiated by the applicants (Vlaho v.\u00a0Bosnia and Herzegovina [Committee], no.15676\/20, 10\u00a0December 2020).<\/p>\n

24. The Court further considers that the applicants must have suffered some non-pecuniary damage which cannot be sufficiently compensated by the finding of a violation alone. Consequently, taking into account the circumstances of the case, in particular the fact that the applicants have already been awarded compensation (see paragraph 10 above), and making its assessment on an equitable basis, the Court awards for each of the applications EUR 2\u00a0000 in respect of non\u2011pecuniary damages.<\/p>\n

25. According to the Court\u2019s case-law, an applicant is entitled to the reimbursement of costs and expenses only in so far as it has been shown that these have been actually and necessarily incurred and are reasonable as to quantum. In the present case, regard being had to the documents in its possession and the above criteria, the Court considers it reasonable to award jointly to the applicants EUR 3\u00a0000 covering costs and expenses.<\/p>\n

FOR THESE REASONS, THE COURT, UNANIMOUSLY,<\/strong><\/p>\n

1. Decides to join the applications;<\/p>\n

2. Declares the applications admissible;<\/p>\n

3. Holds that the applications disclose a breach of Article 6 \u00a7 1 of the Convention and Article 1 of Protocol No.\u00a01 concerning the non\u2011enforcement of domestic decisions;<\/p>\n

4. Holds respondent State shall ensure, by appropriate means, within three months, the enforcement of the pending domestic decisions referred to in the appended table;<\/p>\n

5. Holds<\/p>\n

(a) that the respondent State is to pay, within three months, the following amounts, to be converted into the currency of the respondent State at the rate applicable at the date of settlement:<\/p>\n

(i) EUR 2\u00a0000 (two thousand euros) for each application, plus any tax that may be chargeable, in respect of non-pecuniary damage;<\/p>\n

(ii) EUR 3\u00a0000 (three thousand euros) jointly to applicants, plus any tax that may be chargeable to the applicants, in respect of costs and expenses;<\/p>\n

(b) that from the expiry of the above-mentioned three months until settlement simple interest shall be payable on the above amounts at a rate equal to the marginal lending rate of the European Central Bank during the default period plus three percentage points;<\/p>\n

6. Dismisses the remainder of the applicants\u2019 claim for just satisfaction.<\/p>\n

Done in English, and notified in writing on 15 March 2022, pursuant to Rule\u00a077\u00a0\u00a7\u00a7\u00a02 and 3 of the Rules of Court.<\/p>\n

Hasan Bak\u0131rc\u0131 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0Egidijus K\u016bris
\nDeputy Registrar \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 President<\/p>\n

____________<\/p>\n

Appendix 1 \u2013 List of cases<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n
No.<\/strong><\/td>\nApplication no.<\/strong><\/td>\nCase name<\/strong><\/td>\nLodged on<\/strong><\/td>\nApplicant
\nYear of Birth
\nNationality<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
1.<\/td>\n25885\/19<\/td>\nTetik and Others v. Turkey<\/td>\n30\/04\/2019<\/td>\nHasan TET\u0130K<\/strong>
\n1955
\nTurkishS\u00fcrahi TET\u0130K<\/strong>
\n1962
\nTurkishBinev\u015f TET\u0130K<\/strong>
\n1983
\nTurkishYeliz TET\u0130K<\/strong>
\n1989
\nTurkishZozan TET\u0130K<\/strong>
\n1993
\nTurkish<\/p>\n

\u015eehriban TET\u0130K<\/strong>
\n1995
\nTurkish<\/p>\n

Fahrettin TET\u0130K<\/strong>
\n1984
\nTurkish<\/p>\n

Siti \u00d6NER<\/strong>
\n1978
\nTurkish<\/p>\n

Selvi KOYU<\/strong>
\n1986
\nTurkish<\/p>\n

Nurettin TET\u0130K<\/strong>
\n1997
\nTurkish<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

2.<\/td>\n26026\/19<\/td>\n\u00c7ift\u00e7i and Others v. Turkey<\/td>\n30\/04\/2019<\/td>\nNazime \u00c7\u0130FT\u00c7\u0130<\/strong>
\n1963
\nTurkishFeride \u00c7\u0130FT\u00c7\u0130<\/strong>
\n1985
\nTurkishHarun \u00c7\u0130FT\u00c7\u0130<\/strong>
\n1986
\nTurkishAbdullah \u00c7\u0130FT\u00c7\u0130<\/strong>
\n1987
\nTurkishAbidin \u00c7\u0130FT\u00c7\u0130<\/strong>
\n1990
\nTurkish<\/p>\n

Kamile \u00c7\u0130FT\u00c7\u0130 YUR\u011eUN<\/strong>
\n1991
\nTurkish<\/p>\n

Muhsin \u00c7\u0130FT\u00c7\u0130<\/strong>
\n1993
\nTurkish<\/p>\n

Cemile \u00c7\u0130FT\u00c7\u0130<\/strong>
\n1996
\nTurkish<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

3.<\/td>\n26435\/19<\/td>\nErtun\u00e7 and Others v. Turkey<\/td>\n30\/04\/2019<\/td>\nG\u00fcl\u00fczar ERTUN\u00c7<\/strong>
\n1946
\nTurkishG\u00fcler ERTUN\u00c7<\/strong>
\n1979
\nTurkishNazl\u0131 ERTUN\u00c7 HEZER<\/strong>
\n1987
\nTurkishKadriye ERTUN\u00c7 NUYAN<\/strong>
\n1986
\nTurkishAbdullah ERTUN\u00c7<\/strong>
\n1981
\nTurkish<\/p>\n

Abdulsettar ERTUN\u00c7<\/strong>
\n1970
\nTurkish<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

4.<\/td>\n26485\/19<\/td>\nK\u00f6m\u00fcr and Others v. Turkey<\/td>\n30\/04\/2019<\/td>\nErdem K\u00d6M\u00dcR<\/strong>
\n1990
\nTurkishNazime K\u00d6M\u00dcR<\/strong>
\n1967
\nTurkish\u00c7i\u011fdem K\u00d6M\u00dcR AYTON\u011e<\/strong>
\n1998
\nTurkish\u00dcmit K\u00d6M\u00dcR<\/strong>
\n1992
\nTurkishTu\u011fba K\u00d6M\u00dcR<\/strong>
\n1996
\nTurkish<\/p>\n

\u0130brahim K\u00d6M\u00dcR<\/strong>
\n2000
\nTurkish<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

5.<\/td>\n26960\/19<\/td>\n\u015eat\u0131r v. Turkey<\/td>\n30\/04\/2019<\/td>\nArafat \u015eATIR<\/strong>
\n1957
\nTurkish<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
6.<\/td>\n27370\/19<\/td>\nDayan v. Turkey<\/td>\n30\/04\/2019<\/td>\n\u015e\u00fckr\u00fc DAYAN<\/strong>
\n1965
\nTurkish<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
7.<\/td>\n27387\/19<\/td>\nEngin v. Turkey<\/td>\n30\/04\/2019<\/td>\nAbdurrahman ENG\u0130N<\/strong>
\n1962
\nTurkish<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
8.<\/td>\n27390\/19<\/td>\nBasmac\u0131 v. Turkey<\/td>\n30\/04\/2019<\/td>\nAdil BASMAC\u0131<\/strong>
\n1965
\nTurkish<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
9.<\/td>\n27405\/19<\/td>\nHan v. Turkey<\/td>\n30\/04\/2019<\/td>\nAli HAN<\/strong>
\n1948
\nTurkish<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
10.<\/td>\n27409\/19<\/td>\nAtak v. Turkey<\/td>\n30\/04\/2019<\/td>\nMehmet ATAK<\/strong>
\n1967
\nTurkish<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
11.<\/td>\n27415\/19<\/td>\nTinar and Others v. Turkey<\/td>\n19\/04\/2019<\/td>\nMakbule T\u0130NAR<\/strong>
\n1957
\nTurkishTar\u0131k T\u0130NAR<\/strong>
\n1977
\nTurkishKudbettin T\u0130NAR<\/strong>
\n1981
\nTurkishDilek T\u0130NAR<\/strong>
\n1986
\nTurkishNahide T\u0130NAR<\/strong>
\n1990
\nTurkish<\/p>\n

Fazilet YA\u015eAR<\/strong>
\n1980
\nTurkish<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

12.<\/td>\n27433\/19<\/td>\nTa\u015f v. Turkey<\/td>\n30\/04\/2019<\/td>\nHalit TA\u015e<\/strong>
\n1949
\nTurkish<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
13.<\/td>\n27463\/19<\/td>\nAkdeniz v. Turkey<\/td>\n30\/04\/2019<\/td>\nAbd\u00fclhalik AKDEN\u0130Z<\/strong>
\n1978
\nTurkish<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
14.<\/td>\n27468\/19<\/td>\nNoyan v. Turkey<\/td>\n30\/04\/2019<\/td>\nCibrail NOYAN<\/strong>
\n1963
\nTurkish<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
15.<\/td>\n27473\/19<\/td>\nDik\u00e7e v. Turkey<\/td>\n30\/04\/2019<\/td>\nAbdulaziz D\u0130K\u00c7E<\/strong>
\n1960
\nTurkish<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
16.<\/td>\n27483\/19<\/td>\nTemel v. Turkey<\/td>\n30\/04\/2019<\/td>\nMehmet TEMEL<\/strong>
\n1963
\nTurkish<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
17.<\/td>\n27499\/19<\/td>\nAts\u0131z v. Turkey<\/td>\n30\/04\/2019<\/td>\nMuhyettin ATSIZ<\/strong>
\n1962
\nTurkish<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
18.<\/td>\n27505\/19<\/td>\nAkdeniz v. Turkey<\/td>\n30\/04\/2019<\/td>\n\u00d6mer AKDEN\u0130Z<\/strong>
\n1960
\nTurkish<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
19.<\/td>\n27509\/19<\/td>\nAykut v. Turkey<\/td>\n30\/04\/2019<\/td>\nMehmet Emin AYKUT<\/strong>
\n1960
\nTurkish<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
20.<\/td>\n27519\/19<\/td>\n\u00d6zer v. Turkey<\/td>\n30\/04\/2019<\/td>\nMehmet \u00d6ZER<\/strong>
\n1963
\nTurkish<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
21.<\/td>\n27547\/19<\/td>\nAksu v. Turkey<\/td>\n30\/04\/2019<\/td>\nRamazan AKSU<\/strong>
\n1952
\nTurkish<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
22.<\/td>\n27551\/19<\/td>\nAdar v. Turkey<\/td>\n30\/04\/2019<\/td>\nFikret ADAR<\/strong>
\n1963
\nTurkish<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
23.<\/td>\n27589\/19<\/td>\nMilas v. Turkey<\/td>\n30\/04\/2019<\/td>\nS\u0131dd\u0131k M\u0130LAS<\/strong>
\n1946
\nTurkish<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
24.<\/td>\n27602\/19<\/td>\nHan v. Turkey<\/td>\n30\/04\/2019<\/td>\nHamit HAN<\/strong>
\n1961
\nTurkish<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
25.<\/td>\n27605\/19<\/td>\nTok\u00e7u v. Turkey<\/td>\n30\/04\/2019<\/td>\nAbdulmecit TOK\u00c7U<\/strong>
\n1963
\nTurkish<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
26.<\/td>\n27613\/19<\/td>\nDinler v. Turkey<\/td>\n30\/04\/2019<\/td>\n\u00d6mer D\u0130NLER<\/strong>
\n1958
\nTurkish<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
27.<\/td>\n27616\/19<\/td>\nBayhan v. Turkey<\/td>\n30\/04\/2019<\/td>\nHamit BAYHAN<\/strong>
\n1957
\nTurkish<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
28.<\/td>\n27619\/19<\/td>\nYal\u00e7\u0131n v. Turkey<\/td>\n30\/04\/2019<\/td>\nHamdullah YAL\u00c7IN<\/strong>
\n1966
\nTurkish<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
29.<\/td>\n27748\/19<\/td>\nY\u0131lmaz v. Turkey<\/td>\n30\/04\/2019<\/td>\nHur\u015fit YILMAZ<\/strong>
\n1957
\nTurkish<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
30.<\/td>\n28624\/19<\/td>\nTinar v. Turkey<\/td>\n30\/04\/2019<\/td>\nH\u00fcseyin T\u0130NAR<\/strong>
\n1963
\nTurkish<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
31.<\/td>\n28628\/19<\/td>\nDik\u00e7e v. Turkey<\/td>\n30\/04\/2019<\/td>\n\u0130smail D\u0130K\u00c7E<\/strong>
\n1950
\nTurkish<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
32.<\/td>\n29545\/19<\/td>\nAk v. Turkey<\/td>\n30\/04\/2019<\/td>\nMehmet AK<\/strong>
\n1957
\nTurkish<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
33.<\/td>\n29570\/19<\/td>\nKaplan v. Turkey<\/td>\n30\/04\/2019<\/td>\nAli KAPLAN<\/strong>
\n1954
\nTurkish<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
34.<\/td>\n29894\/19<\/td>\nS\u00fcre v. Turkey<\/td>\n30\/04\/2019<\/td>\nSelim S\u00dcRE<\/strong>
\n1956
\nTurkish<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
35.<\/td>\n29899\/19<\/td>\nAyhan v. Turkey<\/td>\n30\/04\/2019<\/td>\nBedel AYHAN<\/strong>
\n1949
\nTurkish<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
36.<\/td>\n29907\/19<\/td>\nErg\u00fcl v. Turkey<\/td>\n30\/04\/2019<\/td>\nArafat ERG\u00dcL<\/strong>
\n1947
\nTurkish<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
37.<\/td>\n29911\/19<\/td>\nKurt v. Turkey<\/td>\n30\/04\/2019<\/td>\nCemal KURT<\/strong>
\n1974
\nTurkish<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
38.<\/td>\n29924\/19<\/td>\nKaya v. Turkey<\/td>\n30\/04\/2019<\/td>\nRamazan KAYA<\/strong>
\n1964
\nTurkish<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

Appendix 2 \u2013 Information on the domestic proceedings<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n
Application <\/strong><\/td>\nPrevious Application<\/strong><\/td>\n1st Proceedings<\/em><\/strong><\/td>\n2nd Proceedings<\/em><\/strong><\/td>\n3rd Proceedings<\/em><\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
25885\/19<\/td>\n77829\/11 32466\/13<\/td>\nJudgment: 28\/09\/2009<\/p>\n

Final on: 02\/04\/2011<\/td>\n

Judgment: 21\/05\/2010 Final on: 20\/07\/2010<\/td>\n\u00d7<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
26026\/19<\/td>\n78272\/11<\/td>\nJudgment: 28\/09\/2009<\/p>\n

Final on: 02\/04\/2011<\/td>\n

Judgment: 21\/05\/2010 Final on: 13\/09\/2010<\/td>\nJudgment: 17\/07\/2008<\/p>\n

Final on: 04\/07\/2010<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

26435\/19<\/td>\n77831\/11<\/td>\nJudgment: 28\/09\/2009<\/p>\n

Final on: 02\/04\/2011<\/td>\n

\u00d7<\/td>\n\u00d7<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
26485\/19<\/td>\n77989\/11<\/td>\nJudgment: 28\/09\/2009<\/p>\n

Final on: 02\/04\/2011<\/td>\n

Judgment: 17\/07\/2008 Final on: 06\/03\/2009<\/td>\nJudgment: 21\/05\/2010<\/p>\n

Final on: 16\/07\/2010<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

26960\/19<\/td>\n78283\/11<\/td>\nJudgment: 28\/09\/2009<\/p>\n

Final on: 02\/04\/2011<\/td>\n

Judgment: 17\/07\/2008 Final on: 06\/03\/2009<\/td>\n\u00d7<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
27370\/19<\/td>\n508\/12 32473\/13<\/td>\nJudgment: 28\/09\/2009<\/p>\n

Final on: 02\/04\/2011<\/td>\n

Judgment: 21\/05\/2010 Final on: 20\/07\/2010<\/td>\n\u00d7<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
27387\/19<\/td>\n78759\/11 32470\/13<\/td>\nJudgment: 28\/09\/2009<\/p>\n

Final on: 02\/04\/2011<\/td>\n

Judgment: 17\/07\/2008 Final on: 06\/03\/2009<\/td>\nJudgment: 21\/05\/2010<\/p>\n

Final on: 20\/07\/2010<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

27390\/19<\/td>\n78728\/11<\/td>\nJudgment: 28\/09\/2009<\/p>\n

Final on: 02\/04\/2011<\/td>\n

Judgment: 17\/07\/2008 Final on: 06\/03\/2009<\/td>\nJudgment: 21\/05\/2010<\/p>\n

Final on: 13\/09\/2010<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

27405\/19<\/td>\n55962\/12<\/td>\nJudgment: 28\/09\/2009<\/p>\n

Final on: 02\/04\/2011<\/td>\n

Judgment: 17\/07\/2008<\/p>\n

Final on: 06\/03\/2009<\/td>\n

Judgment: 21\/05\/2010<\/p>\n

Final on: 16\/07\/2010<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

27409\/19<\/td>\n77833\/11<\/td>\nJudgment: 28\/09\/2009<\/p>\n

Final on: 02\/04\/2011<\/td>\n

Judgment: 17\/07\/2008<\/p>\n

Final on: 06\/03\/2009<\/td>\n

Judgment: 21\/05\/2010<\/p>\n

Final on: 16\/07\/2010<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

27415\/19<\/td>\n509\/12<\/td>\nJudgment: 28\/09\/2009<\/p>\n

Final on: 02\/04\/2011<\/td>\n

\u00d7<\/td>\n\u00d7<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
27433\/19<\/td>\n77754\/11<\/td>\nJudgment: 28\/09\/2009<\/p>\n

Final on: 02\/04\/2011<\/td>\n

\u00d7<\/td>\n\u00d7<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
27463\/19<\/td>\n78774\/11 33469\/13<\/td>\nJudgment: 28\/09\/2009<\/p>\n

Final on: 02\/04\/2011<\/td>\n

Judgment: 21\/05\/2010<\/p>\n

Final on: 16\/07\/2010<\/td>\n

\u00d7<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
27468\/19<\/td>\n77888\/11<\/td>\nJudgment: 28\/09\/2009<\/p>\n

Final on: 02\/04\/2011<\/td>\n

Judgment: 17\/07\/2008<\/p>\n

Final on: 06\/03\/2009<\/td>\n

Judgment: 21\/05\/2010<\/p>\n

Final on: 20\/07\/2010<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

27473\/19<\/td>\n26029\/12<\/td>\nJudgment: 28\/09\/2009<\/p>\n

Final on: 02\/04\/2011<\/td>\n

\u00d7<\/td>\n\u00d7<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
27483\/19<\/td>\n77830\/11<\/td>\nJudgment: 28\/09\/2009<\/p>\n

Final on: 02\/04\/2011<\/td>\n

Judgment: 17\/07\/2008<\/p>\n

Final on: 06\/03\/2009<\/td>\n

Judgment: 21\/05\/2010<\/p>\n

Final on: 16\/07\/2010<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

27499\/19<\/td>\n77837\/11 32460\/13<\/td>\nJudgment: 28\/09\/2009<\/p>\n

Final on: 02\/04\/2011<\/td>\n

Judgment: 21\/05\/2010<\/p>\n

Final on: 20\/07\/2010<\/td>\n

\u00d7<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
27505\/19<\/td>\n77835\/11<\/td>\nJudgment: 28\/09\/2009<\/p>\n

Final on: 02\/04\/2011<\/td>\n

Judgment: 17\/07\/2008<\/p>\n

Final on: 06\/03\/2009<\/td>\n

Judgment: 21\/05\/2010<\/p>\n

Final on: 20\/07\/2010<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

27509\/19<\/td>\n77834\/11<\/td>\nJudgment: 28\/09\/2009<\/p>\n

Final on: 02\/04\/2011<\/td>\n

Judgment: 17\/07\/2008<\/p>\n

Final on: 06\/03\/2009<\/td>\n

Judgment: 21\/05\/2010<\/p>\n

Final on: 20\/07\/2010<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

27519\/19<\/td>\n77836\/11<\/td>\nJudgment: 28\/09\/2009<\/p>\n

Final on: 02\/04\/2011<\/td>\n

Judgment: 17\/07\/2008<\/p>\n

Final on: 06\/03\/2009<\/td>\n

Judgment: 21\/05\/2010<\/p>\n

Final on: 16\/07\/2010<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

27547\/19<\/td>\n511\/12<\/td>\nJudgment: 28\/09\/2009<\/p>\n

Final on: 02\/04\/2011<\/td>\n

\u00d7<\/td>\n\u00d7<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
27551\/19<\/td>\n77758\/11<\/td>\nJudgment: 28\/09\/2009<\/p>\n

Final on: 02\/04\/2011<\/td>\n

Judgment: 17\/07\/2008<\/p>\n

Final on: 06\/03\/2009<\/td>\n

Judgment: 21\/05\/2010<\/p>\n

Final on: 16\/07\/2010<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

27589\/19<\/td>\n513\/12<\/td>\nJudgment: 28\/09\/2009<\/p>\n

Final on: 02\/04\/2011<\/td>\n

Judgment: 17\/07\/2008<\/p>\n

Final on: 06\/03\/2009<\/td>\n

Judgment: 21\/05\/2010<\/p>\n

Final on: 16\/07\/2010<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

27602\/19<\/td>\n77825\/11<\/td>\nJudgment: 28\/09\/2009<\/p>\n

Final on: 02\/04\/2011<\/td>\n

Judgment: 17\/07\/2008<\/p>\n

Final on: 06\/03\/2009<\/td>\n

Judgment: 21\/05\/2010<\/p>\n

Final on: 16\/07\/2010<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

27605\/19<\/td>\n78764\/11<\/td>\nJudgment: 28\/09\/2009<\/p>\n

Final on: 02\/04\/2011<\/td>\n

Judgment: 17\/07\/2008<\/p>\n

Final on: 06\/03\/2009<\/td>\n

Judgment: 21\/05\/2010<\/p>\n

Final on: 16\/07\/2010<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

27613\/19<\/td>\n512\/12 32471\/13<\/td>\nJudgment: 28\/09\/2009<\/p>\n

Final on: 02\/04\/2011<\/td>\n

Judgment: 21\/05\/2010<\/p>\n

Final on: 13\/09\/2010<\/td>\n

\u00d7<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
27616\/19<\/td>\n77832\/11<\/td>\nJudgment: 28\/09\/2009<\/p>\n

Final on: 02\/04\/2011<\/td>\n

Judgment: 17\/07\/2008<\/p>\n

Final on: 06\/03\/2009<\/td>\n

Judgment: 21\/05\/2010<\/p>\n

Final on: 16\/07\/2010<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

27619\/19<\/td>\n77746\/11<\/td>\nJudgment: 28\/09\/2009<\/p>\n

Final on: 02\/04\/2011<\/td>\n

Judgment: 21\/05\/2010<\/p>\n

Final on: 16\/07\/2010<\/td>\n

\u00d7<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
27748\/19<\/td>\n77826\/11<\/td>\nJudgment: 28\/09\/2009<\/p>\n

Final on: 02\/04\/2011<\/td>\n

Judgment: 17\/07\/2008<\/p>\n

Final on: 06\/03\/2009<\/td>\n

Judgment: 21\/05\/2010<\/p>\n

Final on: 16\/07\/2010<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

28624\/19<\/td>\n77827\/11 32467\/13<\/td>\nJudgment: 28\/09\/2009<\/p>\n

Final on: 02\/04\/2011<\/td>\n

Judgment: 21\/05\/2010<\/p>\n

Final on: 16\/07\/2010<\/td>\n

\u00d7<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
28628\/19<\/td>\n77828\/11<\/td>\nJudgment: 28\/09\/2009<\/p>\n

Final on: 02\/04\/2011<\/td>\n

\u00d7<\/td>\n\u00d7<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
29545\/19<\/td>\n77838\/11<\/td>\nJudgment: 28\/09\/2009<\/p>\n

Final on: 02\/04\/2011<\/td>\n

Judgment: 17\/07\/2008<\/p>\n

Final on: 06\/03\/2009<\/td>\n

Judgment: 21\/05\/2010<\/p>\n

Final on: 13\/09\/2010<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

29570\/19<\/td>\n78651\/11<\/td>\nJudgment: 28\/09\/2009<\/p>\n

Final on: 02\/04\/2011<\/td>\n

Judgment: 17\/07\/2008<\/p>\n

Final on: 06\/03\/2009<\/td>\n

Judgment: 21\/05\/2010<\/p>\n

Final on: 20\/07\/2010<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

29894\/19<\/td>\n515\/12 32468\/13<\/td>\nJudgment: 28\/09\/2009<\/p>\n

Final on: 02\/04\/2011<\/td>\n

Judgment: 21\/05\/2010<\/p>\n

Final on: 16\/07\/2010<\/td>\n

\u00d7<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
29899\/19<\/td>\n78229\/11<\/td>\nJudgment: 28\/09\/2009<\/p>\n

Final on: 02\/04\/2011<\/td>\n

Judgment: 17\/07\/2008<\/p>\n

Final on: 06\/03\/2009<\/td>\n

Judgment: 21\/05\/2010<\/p>\n

Final on: 20\/07\/2010<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

29907\/19<\/td>\n78310\/11<\/td>\nJudgment: 28\/09\/2009<\/p>\n

Final on: 02\/04\/2011<\/td>\n

\u00d7<\/td>\n\u00d7<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
29911\/19<\/td>\n78066\/11<\/td>\nJudgment: 28\/09\/2009<\/p>\n

Final on: 02\/04\/2011<\/td>\n

Judgment: 17\/07\/2008<\/p>\n

Final on: 06\/03\/2009<\/td>\n

Judgment: 21\/05\/2010<\/p>\n

Final on: 13\/09\/2010<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

29924\/19<\/td>\n510\/12<\/td>\nJudgment: 28\/09\/2009<\/p>\n

Final on: 02\/04\/2011<\/td>\n

Judgment: 17\/07\/2008<\/p>\n

Final on: 06\/03\/2009<\/td>\n

Judgment: 21\/05\/2010<\/p>\n

Final on: 13\/09\/2010<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n