CodexAI
AND
OR
NOT
"…"
DÉCISION / ECLI
TYPE
DATE
EXTRAIT
PRESS;CHAMBERJUDGMENTS;ENG
ECLI:CEDH:003-2482645-2696229
23 septembre 2008
It held unanimously that there had been a violation of Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 and awarded the applicant’s heirs EUR 7,000 to cover all heads of damage taken together.
Page 29 sur 1190
PRESS;GENERAL;ENG
ECLI:CEDH:003-1274352-1334500
1 mars 2005
Finding that the applicant had been denied access to a court, the Court held unanimously that there had been a violation of Article 6 § 1.
CASELAW;RESOLUTIONS;EXECUTION;ENG
ECLI:CEDH:001-56296
20 octobre 2003
votes to two, that there had been no violation of Article 5, paragraph 1, of the Convention in respect of the arrest and initial detention of the first applicant; - held, unanimously, that there
ECLI:CEDH:003-1489637-1563637
27 octobre 2005
The Court held, by six votes to one, that there had been a violation of Article 5 § 1.
ECLI:CEDH:003-1179015-1224937
2 novembre 2004
The Court therefore held, unanimously, that there had been a violation of Article 6 § 1.
ECLI:CEDH:003-1742323-1833776
8 août 2006
Accordingly, the Court held unanimously that there had been a violation of Article 5 § 3.
CASELAW;JUDGMENTS;CHAMBER;ENG
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2018:0213JUD007438913
13 février 2018
Consequently, he had sustained an open wound to his head.
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2006:0928JUD002401502
28 septembre 2006
s head injuries. He had not hit N.'s head against the pavement. 12.
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2017:0314JUD003621613
14 mars 2017
summer holidays with the children at his home in S.
ECLI:CE:ECHR:1997:1020JUD001973692
20 octobre 1997
On 9 January 1990 the Regional Head Office refused the above application.
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2006:1106JUD004457498
6 novembre 2006
Numerous rounds of negotiations were held. 85.
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2008:0422JUD001621990
22 avril 2008
The applicant stated that this sum had been calculated on the basis of the sum awarded by the Court in the Loizidou case (Article 50, cited above) by way of compensation for non-pecuniary damage, taking
ECLI:CEDH:003-1815779-1904883
17 octobre 2006
The Court therefore held that there had been a violation of Article 5 § 1.
ECLI:CEDH:003-68324-68792
11 juillet 2000
On 4 March 1992 the first hearing was held before the Katowice Regional Court. Subsequently, as the judge rapporteur fell ill, the case was assigned to a new panel of judges.
ECLI:CEDH:003-482639-483840
31 janvier 2002
The applicant has also been awarded a global sum of 100,000 French francs for any non-pecuniary and pecuniary damage, costs and expenses. (The judgment is available only in French.)
ECLI:CEDH:003-972307-1004841
6 avril 2004
The Court held, by five votes to two, that there had been a violation of Article 5 § 3 and awarded the applicant EUR 1,500 for non-pecuniary damage.
CASELAW;JUDGMENTS;COMMITTEE;ENG
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2014:0325JUD008109912
25 mars 2014
The District Court held a hearing and dismissed the case, accepting the applicant’s argument.
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2005:1213JUD002774495
13 décembre 2005
The Court does not, however, find it established that the whole sum claimed under this head can be attributed to the delay in respect of which a violation has been found.
ECLI:CEDH:003-68197-68665
31 juillet 2000
A hearing was held on 30 November 1999.
ECLI:CEDH:003-3254457-3633943
9 septembre 2010
He still suffers from various consequences of the explosion, including an amputated hand and serious problems affecting his sight, hearing and movements.