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

286 résultats pour « Kinga FIL »

TousCCCETACAACACPHTJTCOMCJUEPrud'h.Conv. coll.BOFIP IA

DÉCISION / ECLI

TYPE

DATE

EXTRAIT

CE

CASELAW;JUDGMENTS;CHAMBER;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:2005:1206JUD001996004

Admin. suprême

6 décembre 2005

6 décembre 2005

It quashed the final judgment of 5 November 1997, ordered the re-opening of the proceedings and sent the file to the first instance court for a fresh examination. 23.

Page 12 sur 15

← PrécédentSuivant →
Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;JUDGMENTS;CHAMBER;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:1981:0623JUD000687875

Admin. suprême

23 juin 1981

23 juin 1981

On 23 May 1980, he decided that the Agent should have until 15 August 1980 to file a memorial and that the Delegates should be entitled to file a memorial in reply within two months from the date of the

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;JUDGMENTS;CHAMBER;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:2005:0201JUD005183799

Admin. suprême

1 février 2005

1 février 2005

She also submitted that the Governor could have ruled on the Board's rights in the proceedings himself on the basis of the ample material already contained in the case-file. 43.

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITY;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:2018:0911DEC002975316

Admin. suprême

11 septembre 2018

11 septembre 2018

    The Royal Malaysian Police file was closed on 30 December 1997, apparently on the basis that there was insufficient evidence to charge anyone. 11.

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;JUDGMENTS;CHAMBER;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:2018:0712JUD006278409

Admin. suprême

12 juillet 2018

12 juillet 2018

In our view, the majority placed excessive emphasis on the fact that the applicant had an opportunity to file a claim at the start of the criminal proceedings but failed to do so.

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG

ECLI:CEDH:001-168336

Admin. suprême

10 octobre 2016

10 octobre 2016

The Royal Malaysia Police file was closed on 30 December 1997, apparently on the basis that there was sufficient evidence to charge anyone. 10.

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;DECISIONS;DECCOMMISSION;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:1997:0410DEC002477394

Admin. suprême

10 avril 1997

10 avril 1997

Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms;        Having regard to the application introduced on 27 July 1994 by Andreas WABL against Austria and registered on 4 August 1994 under file

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;JUDGMENTS;COMMITTEE;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:2020:0623JUD007263613

Admin. suprême

23 juin 2020

23 juin 2020

  Greece (just satisfaction) [GC], no. 31107/96 , § 32, ECHR 2000-XI, and Former King of Greece and Others v. Greece [GC] (just satisfaction), no.   25701/94 , § 72, 28 November 2002).

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;JUDGMENTS;CHAMBER;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:2010:0325JUD003038802

Admin. suprême

25 mars 2010

25 mars 2010

the Minister of Industry to allow the purchase of the disputed property under the procedure of section 35(1)(2) of the [Privatisation Act] is unlawful and must therefore be quashed and   ... the file

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;JUDGMENTS;CHAMBER;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:2015:1203JUD000525007

Admin. suprême

3 décembre 2015

3 décembre 2015

The letter included a list of documents that were part of the applicant’s file. B.     Events disclosed subsequent to the communication of the case 11.

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;JUDGMENTS;CHAMBER;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:2013:0115JUD000875905

Admin. suprême

15 janvier 2013

15 janvier 2013

(no. 8759/05) against Romania lodged with the Court under Article 34 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (“the Convention”) by a Romanian national, Ms Julia Kinga

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;JUDGMENTS;CHAMBER;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:1962:0327JUD000021456

Admin. suprême

27 mars 1962

27 mars 1962

De Becker was, in particular, found guilty of having "participated in the enemy’s transformation of legal institutions or organisations, of having undermined the loyalty of Belgian citizens to the King

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;JUDGMENTS;CHAMBER;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:2015:0512JUD007323512

Admin. suprême

12 mai 2015

12 mai 2015

    Shortly before the beginning of the demonstration, members of two religious groups, the Orthodox Parents’ Union and the Saint King Vakhtang Gorgasali’s Brotherhood, arrived in the Tbilisi

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;JUDGMENTS;CHAMBER;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:1994:0623JUD001699790

Admin. suprême

23 juin 1994

23 juin 1994

   On 10 December the Commission produced the file on the proceedings before it, as requested by the Registrar on the President’s instructions. 6.

Source officielle
CC

cr

613726a7cd580146774276e4

Cassation

30 mai 2007

30 mai 2007

Saint Ghislain, l'Audi ayant de fausses plaques d'immatriculation ; qu'avant que Samir X... ne soit mis en examen, la police a entendu un de ses anciens employés, Bassel D..., qui a déclaré qu'en fin

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;JUDGMENTS;CHAMBER;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:2009:0312JUD002034703

Admin. suprême

12 mars 2009

12 mars 2009

It further notes that there is no indication in the case file that the impugned measures had been unreasonable in the circumstances of the case.

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;JUDGMENTS;CHAMBER;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:2011:0308JUD000216205

Admin. suprême

8 mars 2011

8 mars 2011

No copy of the appeal decision was submitted to the case file. 15.

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;JUDGMENTS;CHAMBER;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:2005:1004JUD000656303

Admin. suprême

4 octobre 2005

4 octobre 2005

    The parties did not file observations on the merits. The Chamber decided, after consulting the parties, that no hearing on the merits was required (Rule 59 § 3 in fine ). THE FACTS I.

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;JUDGMENTS;CHAMBER;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:2007:0614JUD003366302

Admin. suprême

14 juin 2007

14 juin 2007

If the owners do not request the annulment of the decision to expropriate, even if they file an action for additional compensation, all property rights over the land in question are transferred to the

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;JUDGMENTS;CHAMBER;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:2007:1002JUD004234104

Admin. suprême

2 octobre 2007

2 octobre 2007

An advocate instructed by the applicant to defend the claim failed to file a Defence in the prescribed period, and judgment was entered for CJM on 5 January 1994.

Source officielle