CodexAI
AND
OR
NOT
"…"
DÉCISION / ECLI
TYPE
DATE
EXTRAIT
CASELAW;JUDGMENTS;CHAMBER;ENG
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2012:0131JUD003920607
31 janvier 2012
He drank a lot and became jealous. Later, while he and his girlfriend were in another room, witnesses heard a shot. They went to the room and saw the victim lying in a pool of blood.
Page 15 sur 18
CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITY;ENG
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2004:1209DEC002611102
9 décembre 2004
Finally, as jealousy was a recurring theme in life, the Maltese legislator had protected wives and their children from the antics of jealous husbands or fathers.
CASELAW;DECISIONS;DECCOMMISSION;ENG
ECLI:CE:ECHR:1996:0517DEC002345294
17 mai 1996
It emerged that Paget-Lewis had developed an attachment to Ahmet and, jealous, was attempting to sever Ahmet's friendship with Leslie.
ECLI:CE:ECHR:1996:1021DEC002706195
21 octobre 1996
Pursuant to Section 22 of the Constitutional Court Act (Zákon o organizácii Ústavného súdu Slovenskej republiky, o konaní pred ním a o postavení jeho sudcov) of 20 January
CASELAW;JUDGMENTS;CHAMBER;FRA;FRE
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2005:0324JUD007790901
24 mars 2005
récemment décidé que la détention au sens de l’article 5 § 1 c) ne pouvait être ordonnée que dans le cadre d’une procédure pénale et aux seules fins de traduire l’intéressé devant le juge compétent ( Jecius
5e chambre civile
670f583b4ad0d5ee7d7e5b9e
15 octobre 2024
par son syndic en exercice C'PANTEL IMMO, sis [Adresse 4], lui-même pris en la personne de son représentant légal domicilié de droit audit siège [Adresse 4] [Localité 8] Représentée par Me Benjamin JEGOU
Pôle 5 - Chambre 7
6162886bdafa129e39951814
28 mars 2013
domicile au cabinet de Maître FISSELIER & Associés [Adresse 3] assistée de : - la SCP FISSELIER & Associés avocats associés au barreau de PARIS, toque : L0044 [Adresse 3] - Maître Estelle JEGOU
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2012:0612JUD004043707
12 juin 2012
remedies pursuant to section 53(1) of the Constitutional Court Act (Law no. 38/1993 Coll., as amended – Zákon o organizácii Ústavného súdu Slovenskej republiky, o konaní pred ním a o postavení jeho
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2012:0612JUD003018907
under section 53(1) of the Constitutional Court Act (Law no. 38/1993 Coll., as amended – Zákon o organizácii Ústavného súdu Slovenskej republiky, o konaní pred ním a o postavení jeho
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2003:0610DEC004958999
10 juin 2003
Lord Hoffman recalled that the general rule was that the extension of absolute privilege was to be viewed with the “most jealous suspicion, and resisted, unless its necessity is demonstrated”.
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2002:0321DEC002953795
21 mars 2002
He had also been pathologically jealous.
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2005:0623DEC007715101
23 juin 2005
She was also very jealous of her brother. Both children lacked a daily routine and had to learn how to play.
ECLI:CE:ECHR:1995:0111DEC002421194
11 janvier 1995
rozhoduje o ústavních stíznostech proti opatrením, ... rozhodnutím nebo jinym zásahum orgánu verejné moci, jestlize stezovatel tvrdí, ze jimi byly poruseny jeho
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2006:0214JUD007323301
14 février 2006
. - Zákon o zodpovednosti za škodu spôsobnú rozhodnutím orgánu štátu alebo jeho nesprávnym úradným postupom ). 36.
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2005:0215JUD005154599
15 février 2005
No. 58/1969 on the liability of the State for damage caused by a State organ's decision or by its erroneous official action ( Zákon o zodpovednosti za škodu spôsobenú rozhodnutím orgánu štátu alebo jeho
8ème chambre
630710847786aac563f2757d
24 août 2022
15.611,04 euros TTC lot 4, (pièce N°12 C) de la société MQE pour 15.725,47 euros TTC lot 5, (pièce N°12 D) de la société Techni'chauf pour 19.940,40 euros TTC lot 6, (pièce N°12 E) de la société Ambiance Jeco
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2002:1210DEC004022198
10 décembre 2002
/1969 on the liability of the State for damage caused by a State organ’s decision or by its erroneous official action ( Zákon o zodpovednosti za škodu spôsobenú rozhodnutím orgánu štátu alebo jeho
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2003:0708DEC007043401
8 juillet 2003
He recalled that the general rule was that the extension of absolute privilege was to be viewed with the “most jealous suspicion, and resisted, unless its necessity is demonstrated”.
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2007:0913DEC006821601
13 septembre 2007
The Court reiterates that, where an applicant dies during the examination of a case, his or her heirs or next of kin may in principle pursue the application on his or her behalf (see Jecius v.
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2003:0527JUD004342598
27 mai 2003
The Court is satisfied that the sum claimed was actually and necessarily incurred, and reasonable as to quantum (see, among other authorities, Jecius v.