CodexAI

par KI

Workspace

Toutes les décisions2.7M+Récentes

Judiciaires

Cour de CassationCour d'AppelTribunal JudiciaireTrib. de Commerce

Administratives

Conseil d'ÉtatCour Admin. d'AppelTrib. Administratif

Codes de loi

Code civilCode du travailCode de commerceCode pénalCode procédure civileCGICode sécu. socialeCode de l'urbanismeCode de l'enviro.Code monétaire fin.

Droit social

Prud'hommes19KConventions coll.26KDoctrine fiscale14K

IA & Outils

IA JuridiqueNEWVeille hebdoNEWMCP ServerAPICitationsStatistiquesAlertes
ConnexionS'inscrire

CodexAI

RechercheJurisprudenceCodesCitationsStatistiquesAlertes
Juridiction
Tri
DeÀ
Avocat
Opérateurs : AND · OR · NOT · "…"
RechercheDécisionsCodesCPHAlertes
Exporter CSV

215 résultats pour « Barbara HOLL »

TousCCCETACAACACPHTJTCOMCJUEPrud'h.Conv. coll.BOFIP IA

DÉCISION / ECLI

TYPE

DATE

EXTRAIT

CE

CASELAW;REPORTS;FRA;FRE

ECLI:CE:ECHR:1991:0114REP001235186

Admin. suprême

14 janvier 1991

14 janvier 1991

  D.H. arrêt Barbera et autres du 6.12.1988, série A n° 146, p. 31 par. 68).   48.

Page 10 sur 11

← PrécédentSuivant →
Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITY;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:2013:0521DEC004519909

Admin. suprême

21 mai 2013

21 mai 2013

In particular, the European Court may require a new examination of the case, as it did in the case of Barbera, Messeque and Jabardo v. Spain of 6 December 1998.

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITY;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:2003:1021DEC004767599

Admin. suprême

21 octobre 2003

21 octobre 2003

; font-size:10pt } .s653E6C45 { font-family:Arial; font-size:6.67pt; vertical-align:super; color:#0069d6 } FOURTH SECTION DECISION AS TO THE ADMISSIBILITY OF Application nos. 47675/99 and others by Barbara

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;JUDGMENTS;CHAMBER;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:2003:0624JUD004427798

Admin. suprême

24 juin 2003

24 juin 2003

    Holds that there has been a violation of Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 to the Convention;     2.

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;JUDGMENTS;CHAMBER;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:2016:0628JUD007094511

Admin. suprême

28 juin 2016

28 juin 2016

In appropriate cases, this may include compensation in respect of loss of earnings (see, among other authorities, Barberà, Messegué and Jabardo v.

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;JUDGMENTS;CHAMBER;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:2010:0401JUD003746304

Admin. suprême

1 avril 2010

1 avril 2010

    Holds by five votes to two that there has been a violation of Article 3 of the Convention;   3.

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;REPORTS;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:1993:0504REP001673790

Admin. suprême

4 mai 1993

4 mai 1993

Court H.R., Barberà, Messegué and Jabardo judgment of 6 December 1988, Series A no. 146, p. 31, para. 67).

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITY;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:2002:0108DEC003564097

Admin. suprême

8 janvier 2002

8 janvier 2002

Spain judgment of 21   January 1999, Reports 1999-1, § 28 and the Barberà, Messegué and Jabardo v. Spain judgment of 6   December 1988, Series A no. 146, p. 31, §   68).

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;REPORTS;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:1993:0504REP001486189

Admin. suprême

4 mai 1993

4 mai 1993

Court H.R., Barberà, Messegué and Jabardo judgment of 6 December 1988, Series A no. 146, p. 31, para. 67).

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;JUDGMENTS;CHAMBER;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:1994:1209JUD001342787

Admin. suprême

9 décembre 1994

9 décembre 1994

The Division refuses to apply unconstitutional provisions and, pursuant to Article 563 para. 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure, holds that it is bound to refer the case to the Court of Cassation sitting

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITY;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:2004:0909DEC005332999

Admin. suprême

9 septembre 2004

9 septembre 2004

  29, §   46; Barberà, Messegué and Jabardo   v.   Spain , judgment of 6   December 1988, Series   A no.   146, p.   31, §   68).

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;JUDGMENTS;CHAMBER;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:2010:0603JUD005281207

Admin. suprême

3 juin 2010

3 juin 2010

    Turning to the present case, the Court, firstly, finds it established that the first applicant does not hold Russian nationality.

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITY;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:2006:0214DEC005343499

Admin. suprême

14 février 2006

14 février 2006

  (b)     he had not had access to court as the Tax Rectification Committee and the County Administrative Court of Uusimaa were not independent and impartial tribunals as they did not hold

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;JUDGMENTS;CHAMBER;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:2015:0616JUD004862107

Admin. suprême

16 juin 2015

16 juin 2015

§ 93, ECHR 2013), viewed as a procedural guarantee in the context of a criminal trial itself, the presumption of innocence imposes requirements in respect of, inter alia , the burden of proof (see Barberà

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;JUDGMENTS;CHAMBER;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:2016:0112JUD005777413

Admin. suprême

12 janvier 2016

12 janvier 2016

With respect to the allocation of cases, the Venice Commission - in line with Council of Europe standards [9] - holds that “the allocation of cases to individual judges should be based on objective and

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;JUDGMENTS;CHAMBER;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:2008:1014JUD004063102

Admin. suprême

14 octobre 2008

14 octobre 2008

adversarial procedure and can also be derived from the guarantees contained, in particular, in sub-paragraph   (c) of paragraph 3 of Article 6 – “to defend himself in person” (see, among others, Barberà

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITY;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:2002:1003DEC004613399

Admin. suprême

3 octobre 2002

3 octobre 2002

Consequently, the Court, being required to give a ruling in the light of the case as it now stands, holds that it has jurisdiction to settle this issue. b)     The Government further submit that

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITY;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:2000:0504DEC003864297

Admin. suprême

4 mai 2000

4 mai 2000

  Holds that this irregularity, seeing that the offenders were not caught in the act, had the effect of infringing the rights of those against whom proceedings have been brought, and that at the same

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;REPORTS;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:1991:0307REP001423488

Admin. suprême

7 mars 1991

7 mars 1991

          The applicants in the second application were represented by Mmes Barbara Hussey and Co., solicitors, Dublin.   4.

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;JUDGMENTS;CHAMBER;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:2017:0314JUD004728715

Admin. suprême

14 mars 2017

14 mars 2017

    The applicants were represented by Ms Barbara Pohárnok, a lawyer practising in Budapest.

Source officielle