CodexAI
AND
OR
NOT
"…"
DÉCISION / ECLI
TYPE
DATE
EXTRAIT
1ere Chambre Section 1
69e06ebdcdc6046d4768bc82
15 avril 2026
Par jugement réputé contradictoire du 17 mai 2023, le tribunal judiciaire de Toulouse a : - condamné in solidum la Sas [D] [F] et son assureur, la Sa Acte lard, à payer à la Sas Garona Villa la somme
Page 14 sur 44
CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITY;ENG
ECLI:CE:ECHR:1999:0330DEC004014098
30 mars 1999
in Świecie.
CASELAW;JUDGMENTS;CHAMBER;ENG
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2011:0419JUD002425405
19 avril 2011
The applicant alleged, inter alia , that the lustration proceedings in his case had been unfair, in violation of Article 6 of the Convention. 4.
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2002:1024DEC006828601
24 octobre 2002
1942 and lives in Štip.
CASELAW;JUDGMENTS;COMMITTEE;ENG
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2021:0427JUD004712410
27 avril 2021
The Court reiterates at the outset that conflicting decisions in similar cases heard in the same court which, in addition, is the court of last instance in the matter may, in the absence
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2007:0329DEC002312304
29 mars 2007
in public or private, to manifest his religion or belief, in worship, teaching, practice and observance. 2.
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2022:0705JUD003102915
5 juillet 2022
It is moreover necessary to consider, inter alia , the diversity of the submissions that a litigant may bring before the courts and the differences existing in the Contracting States in statutory provisions
ECLI:CE:ECHR:1999:0615DEC003898697
15 juin 1999
Belgium in the years 1985 and 1986, thereby causing the tax authorities a loss in the amount of 72,960 DKK.
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2000:0406DEC003208596
6 avril 2000
In its decision the court emphasised, inter alia , the lack of ties with Denmark of the suspects, including the applicant, and the contradictory statements made by the suspects.
CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITYCOM;ENG
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2021:0518DEC001643310
18 mai 2021
The applicant in the first case, Mr Zeki Çiçek, was born in 1962. The applicant in the second case, Mr Hüseyin Kara, was born in 1965.
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2002:1112JUD004612999
12 novembre 2002
In a judgment of 30 September 1994, the Pardubice District Court ( okresní soud ) found in favour of M.R., holding, inter alia : “[The applicants] have invited the Court to dismiss M.R.'
ECLI:CE:ECHR:1986:1124JUD000906380
24 novembre 1986
Lagergren (Article 43 in fine of the Convention and Rule 21 § 4) (art. 43). Subsequently, Mr. García de Enterría and Mr.
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2012:0510JUD002832803
10 mai 2012
In its judgment of 16 June 2005 in case no.
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2009:0908DEC003956103
8 septembre 2009
The applicant was allocated a flat in 1970 in a building owned by the Śródmieście Housing Cooperative in Szczecin.
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2006:0829DEC000935903
29 août 2006
1937 and lives in Ruda-Huta.
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2003:0121DEC002132202
21 janvier 2003
1949 and lives in Limassol.
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2005:1124DEC001481002
24 novembre 2005
The applicant appealed, inter alia , on the ground that the district court had not read out at the hearing the full text of the judgment in breach of the Code of Civil Procedure.
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2016:1220JUD001647611
20 décembre 2016
The Court further observes, as it found in the judgment in the case of García Mateos v.
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2013:1015DEC002633807
15 octobre 2013
1975 and lives in Bor.
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2009:0602DEC002905606
2 juin 2009
In any event, the Court of Appeal addressed the issue in its decision announcing the reasons for the dismissal of the appeal and in the appeal decision itself.