[B] [Adresse 2] [Localité 3] représentée par Me Cédric PUTANIER de la SELARL CEDRIC PUTANIER AVOCATS, avocat au barreau de LYON substituée par Me Marjolaine BELLEUDY, avocat au barreau de LYON

] Dossier : N° RG 24/00617 - N° Portalis DBWH-W-B7I-G3GK Décision n° 370/2026 Notifié le à - Société [4] - CAISSE PRIMAIRE D’ASSURANCE MALADIE DE L’AIN Copie le à - SELARL CEDRIC PUTANIER

Adresse 1] [Adresse 1] Accident du travail de Monsieur [A] [P] représentée par Me Anne-Laure DENIZE de l'ASSOCIATION KUPERMAN-ARNAUD-DENIZE, avocat au barreau de PARIS substituée par Me Cédric PUTANIER

René L..., demeurant Métairie Rouge, En Puignier, 81700 Puylaurens-en-Puignier, 13 / de Mme R..., demeurant à Félines, 82160 Caylus, 14 / de M. Robert O..., demeurant ..., 15 / de M.

Undertaking complained of depended on a private citizen and a police officer working together, and they could hardly be dissociated from each other - the former played decisive role in conceiving and putting

measures which had been taken in consequence of the judgment of 8 March 2001, having regard to Portugal’s obligation under Article 46, paragraph 1, of the Convention to abide by it, in particular by putting

in cases which primarily involved a risk to the applicant’s life or physical well-being, the ensuing existence of the applicant’s wish to pursue his application could not be the only criterion for putting

On 21 August 2009 and 21 July 2009 respectively the applicants were arrested and charged with the offence of producing and putting in circulation counterfeit money.

In the applicants’ case the interference – the loss of part of their pensions – had a lawful basis in the 2009 Act and pursued the legitimate aim of putting an end to pension advantages regarded as unwarranted

proceedings; Stressing the obligation of every state, under Article 46, paragraph 1, of the Convention, to abide by the judgments of the Court, including through the adoption of individual measures putting

A claim by the applicant for future losses was rejected, subject to action being taken by the Government to put an end to the violation found by putting in place a mechanism which would allow a fair amount

Such an appeal had therefore been capable of putting an end to the interference of which the applicant had complained in his application.

    Without prejudice to the answer to the previous question and assuming that the applicant can claim to be a victim, was he afforded a reasonable opportunity of putting his case before the

    Did the applicant have a reasonable opportunity of putting his case to the competent authorities for the purpose of effectively challenging the measures interfering with his right guaranteed

impairment of family life for having to spend own money on medical treatment not provided by State: inadmissible   Article 2 Article 2-1 Life Alleged inadequacy of State financing of medical treatment, putting

DBVW-V-B7F-HWWU Décision déférée à la Cour : 13 Octobre 2021 par le pôle social du Tribunal Judiciaire de STRASBOURG APPELANTE : S.N.C. [6] [Adresse 3] [Localité 4] Représentée par Me Cédric PUTANIER

RENAULT, muni(e) d'un pouvoir spécial INTIMEE : SOCIETE AXIMA 46 Bd de la Prairie au Duc 44200 NANTES représentée par maître MARQUET, avocat au barreau d'Angers, substituant Maître Cédric PUTANIER

RENAULT, muni(e) d'un pouvoir spécial INTIMEE : SOCIETE AXIMA 46 Bd de la Prairie au Duc 44200 NANTES représentée par maître MARQUET, avocat au barreau d'Angers, substituant Maître Cédric PUTANIER