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

4 744 résultats pour « Sher MESSINGER »

TousCCCETACAACACPHTJTCOMCJUEPrud'h.Conv. coll.BOFIP IA

DÉCISION / ECLI

TYPE

DATE

EXTRAIT

CE

CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG

ECLI:CEDH:001-246042

Admin. suprême

13 octobre 2025

13 octobre 2025

Consequently, it ordered that compensation for the de facto expropriation be paid to the applicants in proportion to their shares, together with “statutory interest” accruing from the date they brought

Page 24 sur 238

← PrécédentSuivant →
Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;JUDGMENTS;CHAMBER;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:2013:1003JUD004672611

Admin. suprême

3 octobre 2013

3 octobre 2013

She also asked that her share in the ownership of a jointly owned car be established. 9.

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;JUDGMENTS;CHAMBER;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:2007:1122JUD002260302

Admin. suprême

22 novembre 2007

22 novembre 2007

Each founder was declared to hold 14.28% of the applicant's share capital.

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;CLIN;ENG

ECLI:CEDH:002-1274

Admin. suprême

15 octobre 2009

15 octobre 2009

a 2001 amendment to the Commercial Code shareholders of joint-stock companies were given the power to wind up the company and transfer all its assets to any shareholder owning more than 90% of its shares

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;CLIN;ENG

ECLI:CEDH:002-12459

Admin. suprême

7 mai 2019

7 mai 2019

fulfil its aims, because it no longer had any assets except for two buildings which generated its sole revenue from rents, any donations it received were minimal, the income indicated in its balance sheet

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;JUDGMENTS;COMMITTEE;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:2024:1024JUD003122214

Admin. suprême

24 octobre 2024

24 octobre 2024

It follows that the parts of the complaint relating to those claims are incompatible   ratione materiae   with the provisions of the Convention and the Protocols thereto within the meaning of

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITYCOM;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:2025:0624DEC000067415

Admin. suprême

24 juin 2025

24 juin 2025

or to perform other acts aimed at the separate alienation of their respective shares, and that those shares could not be regarded as separate “possessions” as such because they were attached to an apartment

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITY;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:2000:0210DEC002804695

Admin. suprême

10 février 2000

10 février 2000

attorney to sell company shares without having the right to do so.

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;JUDGMENTS;CHAMBER;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:2009:0922JUD001607890

Admin. suprême

22 septembre 2009

22 septembre 2009

  G80; description: field; area: 5,342 sq. m; share:   ½; (b)   Nicosia, Yerollakkos, plot no.   189, sheet/plan: XXI/43.W.I, registration no.

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;JUDGMENTS;CHAMBER;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:2005:1124JUD004633699

Admin. suprême

24 novembre 2005

24 novembre 2005

    The legal requirements for the organisation of meetings are laid down in the Meetings and Marches Act of 1990 („Закон за събранията, митингите и манифестациите“).

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;DECISIONS;DECCOMMISSION;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:1990:0907DEC001225986

Admin. suprême

7 septembre 1990

7 septembre 1990

Further, the company had failed to appear at a negotiation meeting convened by the local branch for 28 February 1985 and to a central negotiation meeting, convened by the Union for 21 May 1985, in breach

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITY;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:2002:0514DEC006719901

Admin. suprême

14 mai 2002

14 mai 2002

In 1950, a 1/6 share in the joint ownership belonging to the applicant’s uncle was also formally confiscated. The applicant’s share was never formally confiscated.

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITY;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:2002:1126DEC002943902

Admin. suprême

26 novembre 2002

26 novembre 2002

The Law therefore stays the execution of all writs by the State Bailiffs’ Office against the assets of undertakings in which the State holds at least 25% of the share capital.

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG

ECLI:CEDH:001-161837

Admin. suprême

10 mars 2016

10 mars 2016

Committee instituted criminal proceedings on account of aggravated tax evasion against the applicant, former executive director and founder of “Pizza Di Roma” LLC (the company) who held 100% of its shares

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG

ECLI:CEDH:001-110027

Admin. suprême

26 janvier 2012

26 janvier 2012

Moreover, he had to share a room with fourteen other detainees. Some of the detainees were smokers, although his medical condition prohibited the applicant from being an active or passive smoker.

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG

ECLI:CEDH:001-128012

Admin. suprême

8 octobre 2013

8 octobre 2013

On 18   January 2010 the debtor’s capital was transferred to the Share Fund of the Republic of Serbia.

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITY;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:2006:0105DEC006897801

Admin. suprême

5 janvier 2006

5 janvier 2006

Z.B. owned the remaining 81% of shares and was also the owner of an American company.

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITY;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:2004:0406DEC004626099

Admin. suprême

6 avril 2004

6 avril 2004

She stated that the incident occurred around 9.30 a.m.

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;JUDGMENTS;CHAMBER;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:2006:0613JUD006608301

Admin. suprême

13 juin 2006

13 juin 2006

His own share in the above land as well as the share inherited from Mrs D. passed to the applicant and her sister. 7.

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;JUDGMENTS;CHAMBER;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:2002:0924JUD003052696

Admin. suprême

24 septembre 2002

24 septembre 2002

Following the death of the brother and his wife in 1967, the estates, including the applicants, claimed that they were entitled to a share of the profits on the contracts concluded by the brother.

Source officielle