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

2 899 résultats pour « Merrily ADRASSE »

TousCCCETACAACACPHTJTCOMCJUEPrud'h.Conv. coll.BOFIP IA

DÉCISION / ECLI

TYPE

DATE

EXTRAIT

CE

CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITY;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:2003:0619DEC004616599

Admin. suprême

19 juin 2003

19 juin 2003

This was shown by the fact that he had been determined to obtain information about her pregnancy from her gynaecologist and to be informed about the address of the clinic where the child was to be born

Page 110 sur 145

← PrécédentSuivant →
Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITY;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:2025:0930DEC003561022

Admin. suprême

30 septembre 2025

30 septembre 2025

    The Government submitted that, in order to address the operational difficulties of the smallest fuel retailers and to ensure the continued functioning of the market, the legislature had subsequently

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITY;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:2013:0528DEC000504404

Admin. suprême

28 mai 2013

28 mai 2013

However, the Supreme Court of Cassation has also ruled that the prohibition of discrimination set out in the Act is merely a reflection of the similar prohibitions set out earlier in Article   6 §

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;JUDGMENTS;CHAMBER;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:2017:1121JUD006039915

Admin. suprême

21 novembre 2017

21 novembre 2017

It   therefore considers it appropriate to join this objection to the merits of that complaint. 3.     Conclusion 49.

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;JUDGMENTS;CHAMBER;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:2001:0925JUD003189396

Admin. suprême

25 septembre 2001

25 septembre 2001

He maintained that he had not been involved in violent acts and that he was merely an activist in the organisation. 11.

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;JUDGMENTS;CHAMBER;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:2011:0621JUD003510504

Admin. suprême

21 juin 2011

21 juin 2011

However, as his personal rights had been breached, it considered that an amount of PLN 10,000 was appropriate in the circumstances as it was more than merely symbolic. 15.

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;JUDGMENTS;CHAMBER;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:1995:0719JUD001750690

Admin. suprême

19 juillet 1995

19 juillet 1995

In short, according to the Government, the Supreme Court did not and could not review the merits of the applicant’s case. 34.

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;JUDGMENTS;CHAMBER;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:1993:0420JUD001432788

Admin. suprême

20 avril 1993

20 avril 1993

On 30 June legal aid was granted for the purpose of obtaining counsel’s opinion on the merits of an appeal.

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;JUDGMENTS;CHAMBER;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:2023:0706JUD005458813

Admin. suprême

6 juillet 2023

6 juillet 2023

Merits The parties’ submissions 45.

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;JUDGMENTS;CHAMBER;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:2001:0925JUD003336896

Admin. suprême

25 septembre 2001

25 septembre 2001

    Merits of the complaints 1.     Length of the proceedings (a)     Period to be taken into consideration 23.

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITY;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:2009:1110DEC001285303

Admin. suprême

10 novembre 2009

10 novembre 2009

It held a meeting on 7 September 1999, at which it discussed the relative merits of the two schemes. It noted that both lacked checks on the stability of the pond.

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;JUDGMENTS;CHAMBER;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:2008:0403JUD000077303

Admin. suprême

3 avril 2008

3 avril 2008

The company’s actual address is in London (United Kingdom). It was represented before the Court by its director, Mr   Yuriy   Portnik, who resides in London. A.

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;JUDGMENTS;CHAMBER;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:2017:0907JUD004370114

Admin. suprême

7 septembre 2017

7 septembre 2017

Her mother’s alleged inability to cooperate had in fact merely been a question of disagreement.

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;JUDGMENTS;COMMITTEE;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:2019:1212JUD003068009

Admin. suprême

12 décembre 2019

12 décembre 2019

Merits The parties’ submissions 46.     The applicant maintained that the domestic courts had failed to make reasonable efforts, if any, to secure the attendance of the absent witness, D.M.

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;JUDGMENTS;CHAMBER;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:2016:0524JUD003693408

Admin. suprême

24 mai 2016

24 mai 2016

The court did not address the applicant’s statement, the medical reports attesting to her medical condition or her requests for the incident to be examined as rape.

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITY;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:2014:1202DEC001944010

Admin. suprême

2 décembre 2014

2 décembre 2014

(c)     Proceedings on the merits of the dispute 15.

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;JUDGMENTS;CHAMBER;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:2019:1017JUD001415607

Admin. suprême

17 octobre 2019

17 octobre 2019

    Merits 50.

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITY;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:2005:0322DEC002879302

Admin. suprême

22 mars 2005

22 mars 2005

their halt As regards the request of 23 January 2002 addressed to the Ministry of Justice by the Municipality for the interpretation of the law, the Ministry of Justice did not reply to it and did not address

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;JUDGMENTS;CHAMBER;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:1999:1214JUD003817897

Admin. suprême

14 décembre 1999

14 décembre 1999

    On 17 November 1998 the Chamber decided to invite the parties to a hearing on admissibility and merits. The hearing took place on 26 January 1999.

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;JUDGMENTS;CHAMBER;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:2014:1204JUD001641206

Admin. suprême

4 décembre 2014

4 décembre 2014

    Merits 1.     Non-attendance of the prosecution witness M. 28.

Source officielle