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 · "…"
Exporter CSV

9 387 résultats pour « Guiot »

RechercheDécisionsCodesCPHAlertes
Tous
CC
CE
TA
CAA
CA
CPH
TJ
TCOM
CJUE
Prud'h.
Conv. coll.
BOFIP
IA

DÉCISION / ECLI

TYPE

DATE

EXTRAIT

CE

CASELAW;JUDGMENTS;CHAMBER;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:1992:1216JUD001298187

Admin. suprême

16 décembre 1992

16 décembre 1992

If liberty is refused simply because of the strong suspicion of guilt it violates the concept of the presumption of innocence enshrined in Article 6 (art. 6).

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;REPORTS;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:1997:1202REP002165693

Admin. suprême

2 décembre 1997

2 décembre 1997

Unfair weight was given to the applicant's silence, the drawing of inferences playing a crucial and determinative role in the findings of guilt.   35.

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITY;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:2015:1117DEC006087912

Admin. suprême

17 novembre 2015

17 novembre 2015

A   finding of guilt in the absence of a final conviction must be distinguished, in that context, from the description of a “state of suspicion”.

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITY;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:2009:0908DEC001879007

Admin. suprême

8 septembre 2009

8 septembre 2009

This did not amount to an admission of guilt.

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG

ECLI:CEDH:001-156307

Admin. suprême

26 juin 2015

26 juin 2015

As for the rest, it remained unconvinced that the applicant’s guilt had been proven with the required level of certainty.

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;DECISIONS;DECCOMMISSION;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:1998:0909DEC003176796

Admin. suprême

9 septembre 1998

9 septembre 1998

However, in Danish penal law there is no such thing as collective guilt.

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;REPORTS;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:1998:0701REP003239796

Admin. suprême

1 juillet 1998

1 juillet 1998

The court heard the evidence and the parties' submissions on the question of the accused's guilt.

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;DECISIONS;DECCOMMISSION;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:1998:0909DEC003419996

Admin. suprême

9 septembre 1998

9 septembre 1998

The conclusion of that review was that the findings of guilt reached against him should be quashed. The punishment imposed had been remitted and the finding of guilt deleted from his record.

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITY;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:2000:0125DEC003260296

Admin. suprême

25 janvier 2000

25 janvier 2000

They noted that there had never been a formal finding on the applicant company's guilt, the criminal proceedings having been discontinued for purely procedural reasons.

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;DECISIONS;DECCOMMISSION;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:1989:0314DEC001274887

Admin. suprême

14 mars 1989

14 mars 1989

  However, not every finding of guilt would contravene the principle of the rule of law.

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;DECISIONS;DECCOMMISSION;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:1993:0331DEC001867291

Admin. suprême

31 mars 1993

31 mars 1993

In its judgment of 16 November 1989 the High Court was not called upon to determine the guilt of the applicant but that of his brother.

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITY;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:1998:1215DEC002495294

Admin. suprême

15 décembre 1998

15 décembre 1998

xa0;   On 16 October 1993 the Public Prosecutor attached to the Brindisi District Court requested that the applicant be remanded in custody, on grounds that there was a serious indication of his guilt

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITYCOM;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:2018:0410DEC003810605

Admin. suprême

10 avril 2018

10 avril 2018

The applicant retracted his previous statements and denied his guilt. He requested a confidential meeting with his lawyer, Ms V., before the interview but this was refused.

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITY;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:2013:0903DEC003017809

Admin. suprême

3 septembre 2013

3 septembre 2013

The CACD did not itself assess all the evidence, in the light of the new evidence, in order to decide whether guilt had been established beyond reasonable doubt.

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;JUDGMENTS;CHAMBER;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:2002:0115JUD003249996

Admin. suprême

15 janvier 2002

15 janvier 2002

The court also considered that the submissions made by the applicant in his appeal showed that he was aware of the existence of serious evidence of his guilt. 24.

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITYCOM;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:2011:0920DEC004445507

Admin. suprême

20 septembre 2011

20 septembre 2011

is a difference between a solely summary examination of a case on the one hand, which only refers to the suspicion that a person has committed the crime, and on the other hand, the formal finding of guilt

Source officielle
CA

4eme Chambre Section 2

69df1d98cdc6046d474785bc

Appel

14 avril 2026

14 avril 2026

départage de MONTAUBAN (23/00033) Fanny FOUQUES-HIBERT CONFIRMATION PARTIELLE Grosse délivrée le à Me Amarande-julie GUYOT

Source officielle
CA

4eme Chambre Section 2

69fd7060cdc6046d47023f85

Appel

5 mai 2026

5 mai 2026

Montauban () [M] [W] INFIRMATION Grosse délivrée le à Me Pauline CARRILLO de la SELARL LP AVOCATS Me Amarande-julie GUYOT

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITY;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:1999:1214DEC002762995

Admin. suprême

14 décembre 1999

14 décembre 1999

In the light of the Sekanina judgment, it held that it was not the refusal of a claim for compensation which was contrary to the Convention, but the re-examination of the question of guilt after a final

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;JUDGMENTS;COMMITTEE;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:2017:1114JUD001688707

Admin. suprême

14 novembre 2017

14 novembre 2017

The juror stated that during the trial the presiding Judge Sht. had often visited the deliberations room, that he had spoken of the applicant’s guilt as if it had been already established and that he had

Source officielle

Page 118 sur 470

← PrécédentSuivant →