Müdür Turgut and others v. Turkey - Law no. 6384 is a domestic remedy to be used

CtEDO 2017-11-07 0,91

Law no. 6384, the Court reiterates its conclusion in the case of Turgut and Others (cited above). It therefore concludes that the application must be rejected under Article 35 §§ 1 and 4 of the Convention for non-exhaustion of domestic reme

CtEDO 2017-11-21 0,91

remedy established by Law no. 6384, the Court reiterates its conclusion in the case of Turgut and Others (cited above). It therefore concludes that the application must be rejected under Article 35 §§ 1 and 4 of the Convention for non-exhau

CtEDO 2016-09-27 0,90

the Government’s preliminary objection with regard to the applicant’s failure to make use of the new domestic remedy established by Law no. 6384, the Court reiterates its conclusion in the case of Turgut and Others. It therefore concludes t

CtEDO 2017-10-03 0,90

new domestic remedy established by Law no. 6384, the Court reiterates its conclusion in the case of Yıldız and Yanak (cited above). 19. In view of the above, the Court concludes that the application should be rejected under Article 35 §§ 1

CtEDO 2010-03-02 0,90

use the remedy available under Article 13 of Law no. 2577, as referred to by the Government above (see, inter alia, Pınar Güngör v. Turkey, no. 46745/99, 6 March 2007, and Gülizar Öz v. Turkey, no. 40687/98, 1 July 2004). In the present cas