On 14 May 2003 the Regional Court made an application under Article   263 §   4 of the Code of Criminal Procedure ( Kodeks postępowania karnego ) to the Wroclaw Court of Appeal

On 28 December 2001 the Regional Court made an application under Article 263 § 4 of the Code of Criminal Procedure to the Katowice Court of Appeal, requesting that the applicant's detention be prolonged

    On 14 May 2003 the Regional Court made an application under Article   263 § 4 of the Code of Criminal Procedure ( Kodeks postepowania karnego ) to the Wroclaw Court of Appeal ( Sąd Apelacyjny

    In its decision of 18 December 2002, the Court of Appeal added that the case was “particularly complex” within the meaning of Article 263 §   4 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. 13.

In addition to the grounds previously invoked, the Court of Appeal found that the prolongation of detention was justified under Article 263 § 4 of the Code of Criminal Procedure by the particular complexity

    On 16 September 2004 the District Court made an application to the Cracow Court of Appeal under Article 263 § 4 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, requesting the prolongation of the applicant

In addition, it found that the present case was “particularly complex” within the meaning of Article   263 §   4 of the Code of Criminal Procedure due to, inter alia , the nature of the offences

    On 28 December 2001 the Regional Court made an application under Article 263 § 4 of the Code of Criminal Procedure to the Katowice Court of Appeal for prolongation of the applicant’s detention

On 4 July 2001 the Katowice Court of Appeal, ruling on the applicant’s appeal, upheld the decision and added that it should be based on Article 263 § 4 since the applicant’s detention had already exceeded

263-1-4 ET SUR CELLES DE L'ARTICLE 264 DU CODE GENERAL DES IMPOTS ; QUE LA SOCIETE KAVO-FRANCE CONTESTE SUR CES DEUX POINTS LE JUGEMENT DU TRIBUNAL ADMINISTRATIF DE PARIS QUI A REJETE SES CONCLUSIONS

In the event of a quashing of a final decision by a higher court, the time-limits, for the type of detention to which the case was remitted, start running (Article 263 § 4). b)     Time-limits

PRISE DE LA VIOLATION DE L'ANCIEN ARTICLE 174 DU LIVRE 11 DU CODE DU TRAVAIL, DEVENU L'ARTICLE L 263-3 DU NOUVEAU CODE; VU LEDIT ARTICLE, ENSEMBLE L'ARTICLE L 263-4 DU MEME CODE; ATTENDU QU'AUX

Such a request must be filed no later than three days before the court hearing (Article 263 § 2 of the CCP).

8 de la Déclaration des droits de l'homme et du citoyen du 26 août 1789, 6 et 7 de la Convention des droits de l'homme, 111-3 et 131-3 du Code pénal, L. 231-2, L. 263-2, L. 263-2-1, L. 263-4 et L. 263

Article 263 "... 4.

application de ces dispositions au motif qu'elles n'étaient pas rappelées dans une notice de l'URSSAF dépourvue de toute valeur normative ou réglementaire, les juges du fond ont méconnu les dispositions des articles

In addition to the grounds previously invoked, it found that the prolongation of detention was justified under Article 263 § 4 of the Code of Criminal Procedure by the particular complexity of the case

    On 24 July 2006 the Constitutional Court declared Article 263 § 4 of the Code unconstitutional, holding that its imprecise and broad wording could lead to arbitrary court decisions on detention

In its decision of 7 December 2001, the Court of Appeal found that prolongation of the applicant’s detention beyond the statutory 2-year time-limit was justified under Article 263 § 4 on account of major