Juridiction
Tri
DeÀ
Avocat
Opérateurs : AND · OR · NOT · "…"CodexAI
AND · OR · NOT · "…"DÉCISION / ECLI
TYPE
DATE
EXTRAIT
CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG
ECLI:CEDH:001-179693
1 décembre 2017
1 décembre 2017
QUESTION tO THE PARTIES Has there been a violation of the applicant’s right to freedom of expression, contrary to Article 10 of the Convention?
Source officielleCASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG
ECLI:CEDH:001-228817
9 octobre 2023
9 octobre 2023
QUESTION TO THE PARTIES Has there been a violation of the applicant’s right to respect for his correspondence, contrary to Article 8 of the Convention (see, mutatis mutandis , Cotleţ v.
Source officielleCASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG
ECLI:CEDH:001-192336
11 mars 2019
11 mars 2019
QUESTION tO THE PARTIES Was the applicant tried and punished twice for the same offence, contrary to Article 4 § 1 of Protocol No. 7 (see Igor Tarasov v. Ukraine , no.
Source officielleCASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG
ECLI:CEDH:001-205159
14 septembre 2020
14 septembre 2020
of two levels of jurisdiction rejected the applicant’s claim against the CEC without responding to her argument that the CEC’s decision had been based on inaccurate interpretation of facts and was contrary
Source officielleCASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG
ECLI:CEDH:001-175574
21 juin 2017
21 juin 2017
QUESTION tO THE PARTIES Has there been a violation of the applicant’s right to respect for private life, contrary to Article 8 of the Convention?
Source officielleCASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG
ECLI:CEDH:001-249105
12 février 2026
12 février 2026
QUESTION TO THE PARTIES Has there been a violation of the applicant’s right to respect for his family life contrary to Article 8 of the Convention (see Resin v. Russia , no.
Source officielleCASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG
ECLI:CEDH:001-224994
4 mai 2023
4 mai 2023
QUESTION TO THE PARTIES Has there been a violation of the applicant’s right to respect for his correspondence, contrary to Article 8 of the Convention ( Robathin v. Austria , no.
Source officielleCASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG
ECLI:CEDH:001-217509
3 mai 2022
3 mai 2022
Was the delayed enforcement of the judgment adopted in the applicant’s favour in the present case contrary to Article 6 § 1 of the Convention and/or Article 1 of Protocol
Source officielleCASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG
ECLI:CEDH:001-216620
1 mars 2022
1 mars 2022
Has there been a violation of the applicant’s right to respect for her private life, contrary to Article 8 of the Convention, on account of any failure on the part of the domestic authorities
Source officielleCASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG
ECLI:CEDH:001-249108
9 février 2026
9 février 2026
specifically address whether the public officials, when ordering the second and third applicants to undergo additional border checks and in conducting such checks, subjected them to discrimination contrary
Source officielleCASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG
ECLI:CEDH:001-162391
29 mars 2016
29 mars 2016
Has there been a violation of the applicants’ right to freedom of expression contrary to Article 10 of the Convention? 2.
Source officielleCASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG
ECLI:CEDH:001-167306
12 septembre 2016
12 septembre 2016
QUESTION TO THE PARTIES Has there been a violation of the applicant’s right to freedom of expression, and in particular of his right to impart information and ideas, contrary to Article 10 of the
Source officielleCASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG
ECLI:CEDH:001-170263
13 décembre 2016
13 décembre 2016
The applicant complains that in case of his removal to Uzbekistan he would be subjected to treatment contrary to Article 3 of the Convention. QUESTIONS 1.
Source officielleCASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG
ECLI:CEDH:001-194528
17 juin 2019
17 juin 2019
Has there been a violation of the applicants’ right to respect for their family life, contrary to Article 8 of the Convention, through the authorities’ decision to remove their parental responsibilities
Source officielleCASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG
ECLI:CEDH:001-179985
8 décembre 2017
8 décembre 2017
QUESTION tO THE PARTIES Has there been a violation of the applicant’s right to freedom of expression, contrary to Article 10 of the Convention, on account of his conviction under section 7 § 2 of the Prevention
Source officielleCASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG
ECLI:CEDH:001-192722
28 mars 2019
28 mars 2019
Has there been a violation of the applicants’ right to freedom of peaceful assembly, contrary to Article 11 of the Convention ( Navalnyy v. Russia [GC], nos.
Source officielleCASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG
ECLI:CEDH:001-179371
13 novembre 2017
13 novembre 2017
QUESTION tO THE PARTIES Has there been a violation of the applicant’s right to freedom of expression and/or right to peaceful assembly, contrary to Article 10 and/or Article 11 of the Convention (see Vajnai
Source officielleCASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG
ECLI:CEDH:001-181086
1 février 2018
1 février 2018
Was the refusal of the domestic courts to allow the applicant to amend his civil action and sue the company J. instead of the initial defendant, company D., in breach his right of access to court, contrary
Source officielleCASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG
ECLI:CEDH:001-228182
22 septembre 2023
22 septembre 2023
dismissal of the applicant’s constitutional complaint due to allegedly unforeseeable application of new four-month time-limit, depriving the applicant of right of access to the Constitutional Court, contrary
Source officielleCASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG
ECLI:CEDH:001-210287
4 mai 2021
4 mai 2021
there been a violation of the applicant’s right to respect for his family life, as concerns the non-enforcement of the domestic decisions in his favour relating to access and custody of his children, contrary
Source officiellePage 30 sur 1005