CodexAI
AND
OR
NOT
"…"
DÉCISION / ECLI
TYPE
DATE
EXTRAIT
CASELAW;JUDGMENTS;COMMITTEE;ENG
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2014:1127JUD004529105
27 novembre 2014
The Court reiterates that an unreasonably long delay in the enforcement of a binding judgment may breach the Convention (see Burdov v.
Page 111 sur 868
CASELAW;RESOLUTIONS;EXECUTION;ENG
ECLI:CEDH:001-55523
20 février 1992
In particular, paragraph 5 of Section 109 states the decision taken may be either to declare the request inadmissible as being ill-founded or because the delays found were justified; or to request
CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITY;ENG
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2006:1019DEC000095802
19 octobre 2006
The applicants further contend, without invoking any Article of the Convention, that the rate of interest for delay payable on the additional compensation for expropriation was too low and that the expropriating
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2002:0709DEC005572500
9 juillet 2002
The applicant argues that the delay in the enforcement of the order issued by the Cava De’ Tirreni Magistrate resulted in a denial of his right of access to a court.
CASELAW;CLIN;ENG
ECLI:CEDH:002-2729
15 mai 2007
Admissible : The application was not about personal negligence by judges but about delays in the processing of a case due to the negligent failure of the authorities to take the legislative and regulatory
ECLI:CE:ECHR:1999:1202DEC003975298
2 décembre 1999
On 12 September 1996 the applicant complained about delays in the proceedings to the president of the City Court.
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2002:0131DEC004775899
31 janvier 2002
The applicant further complains under Article 6 of the Convention about the duration of the eviction proceedings and that the delay in the enforcement of the order issued by the Rome Magistrate resulted
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2002:0228DEC005819100
28 février 2002
THE LAW The applicant complains under Article 6 of the Convention about the duration of the eviction proceedings and that the delay in the enforcement of the order issued by the Benevento Magistrate resulted
CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG
ECLI:CEDH:001-175010
7 juin 2017
The applicant company also complains under Article 13 of the Convention that no effective remedies were available to it against undue delays in the civil proceedings.
ECLI:CEDH:002-7492
26 mars 2013
While the authorities had initially acted without undue delay, the case was transferred to a public prosecutor after the applicant’s partner repeatedly failed to appear at court.
CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITYCOM;ENG
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2019:0226DEC005111216
26 février 2019
The Court has held on numerous occasions that the right to court includes a right to have a court decision enforced without undue delay (see EVT COMPANY v.
ECLI:CEDH:002-12901
7 juillet 2020
kilometres) and the need to forward the investigation file to the regional court to enable the latter to examine the applicant’s request with full knowledge of the facts, the Court considered that the delay
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2014:1209DEC004981608
9 décembre 2014
The Government submitted that the complaint had been inadmissible, as the application form of 2 April 2009 had been returned after a long delay.
ECLI:CEDH:002-10339
15 janvier 2015
A number of the delays were attributable to the domestic courts. The authorities had thus failed to take effective steps to execute the interim contact decision of May 2010.
ECLI:CEDH:001-161850
7 mars 2016
They further complain about the overall delay in finalising the restitution process.
ECLI:CEDH:002-752
23 novembre 2010
Article 46: In view of the United Kingdom’s lengthy delay in implementing the decision in Hirst and the significant number of repetitive applications that had been received by the Court shortly before
CASELAW;RESOLUTIONS;MERITS;ENG
ECLI:CEDH:001-52203
26 février 2001
satisfaction, within three months, 2 000 French francs in respect of non-pecuniary damage and that interest should be payable on any unpaid sum, calculated on the basis of each full elapsed month of delay
ECLI:CEDH:001-218411
10 juin 2022
detention as well as the absence of effective domestic remedies to complain about them; Recalling its decision adopted at its 1398 th meeting urging the authorities to establish, without further delay
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2009:0922DEC004253106
22 septembre 2009
Constitutional proceedings On 30 March 2004 the Constitutional Court found that the Žilina District Court had violated the applicant’s right to a hearing without unjustified delay.
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2022:1020DEC004813721
20 octobre 2022
failure to enforce a judgment because of the debtor’s indigence cannot be held against the State unless and to the extent that it is imputable to the domestic authorities, for example, to their errors or delay