CodexAI
AND
OR
NOT
"…"
DÉCISION / ECLI
TYPE
DATE
EXTRAIT
CASELAW;JUDGMENTS;CHAMBER;ENG
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2021:1123JUD000029206
23 novembre 2021
On 22 June 2005 the police fined Mr Corley for residing at an address in Moscow which was different from his registered residence.
Page 105 sur 145
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2025:0610JUD004112017
10 juin 2025
Merits The parties’ submissions (a) The applicant company 50.
CASELAW;DECISIONS;DECCOMMISSION;ENG
ECLI:CE:ECHR:1998:0114DEC003312796
14 janvier 1998
would have been known to the IRT prior to 22 January 1992, or that this address had been identified unlawfully.
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2022:0324JUD000538610
24 mars 2022
It did not explicitly address any of the arguments raised by the applicant in his appeal. 36. The applicant lodged a cassation appeal.
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2017:1212JUD003061415
12 décembre 2017
The Department evaluates the merits of commutation requests by considering various factors, including the disparity or undue severity of a sentence, critical illness or old age, and meritorious service
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2015:1008JUD002833313
8 octobre 2015
He also complained that the medical unit of the correctional colony was not equipped to address his health problems.
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2025:0121JUD007460114
21 janvier 2025
the applicant argued that, even though section 25 of the Minor Offences Act required explicit evidence proving an act deemed to be a minor offence, in imposing the fines on her, the municipality had merely
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2020:0507JUD000367311
7 mai 2020
The case was transferred to the Vayots Dzor Regional Court (“the Regional Court”) for examination on the merits on the same date. 30 .
ECLI:CE:ECHR:1999:1221JUD003329096
21 décembre 1999
Until January 1994 the child lived with her maternal grandparents [name] at Camarate [address]. 8.
CASELAW;JUDGMENTS;GRANDCHAMBER;ENG
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2015:1015JUD002751008
15 octobre 2015
The Court heard addresses by the applicant, Mr Cengiz, Prof Pech, Mr Schürmann, Prof Thürer, Prof Talmon, Mr Kostanyan, Mr Robertson QC and Ms Clooney. THE FACTS I.
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2012:0626JUD003337607
26 juin 2012
Merits 1. The parties’ submissions 67.
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2010:0427JUD004364304
27 avril 2010
It further indicated the addresses of the applicant and his defence counsel for the purpose of sending them summons for questioning.
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2009:1217JUD000476205
17 décembre 2009
The aim of the visit was merely to explain to the applicant that his family was occupying these premises illegally.
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2012:0918JUD002511909
18 septembre 2012
It recommended counselling to address alcohol and substance abuse. The sentencing judge accepted that Mr James was dangerous, particularly when he drank alcohol.
ECLI:CE:ECHR:1994:0419JUD001603490
19 avril 1994
The Tribunal delivered its judgment on the merits on 16 June 1989.
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2018:0208JUD003356611
8 février 2018
Merits 1. The parties’ submissions (a) The applicants 47.
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2024:0604JUD003159218
4 juin 2024
On 18 December 2017 the Court of Cassation upheld the Assize Court judgment of 16 August 2017, stating merely that the judgment declaring the extradition request admissible was in accordance
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2024:1008JUD004167512
8 octobre 2024
An appeal on points of law by the applicant was declared inadmissible for lack of merit by the Court of Cassation on 8 February 2012. 25 .
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2023:0601JUD002482714
1 juin 2023
The parties exchanged observations on the admissibility and merits of the application. 6.
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2003:0624JUD003517997
24 juin 2003
The applicant and the Government each filed observations on the merits (Rule 59 § 1).