Juridiction
Tri
DeÀ
Avocat
Opérateurs : AND · OR · NOT · "…"CodexAI
AND · OR · NOT · "…"DÉCISION / ECLI
TYPE
DATE
EXTRAIT
CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG
ECLI:CEDH:001-218711
6 juillet 2022
6 juillet 2022
Croatia [Committee], no. 27228/14, 4 October 2018 where the Court found a violation of Article 6 §§ 1 and 3 (c) of the Convention because the applicant had not been invited to the session of the
Source officielleCASELAW;CLIN;ENG
ECLI:CEDH:002-3634
24 novembre 2005
24 novembre 2005
The employer enjoyed a margin of appreciation as regards promotion, and it had not been overstepped by considering that the applicant was unsuitable because of his political activities.
Source officielleCASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG
ECLI:CEDH:001-244505
9 juillet 2025
9 juillet 2025
In Mr Cojocari’s case the appeal for cassation was dismissed as inadmissible because he had failed to sign the corresponding application, whereas in Ms Haracicu’s case it was dismissed as
Source officielleAudience publique de vacation
6a0f112ccdc6046d4771d8e4
29 avril 2026
29 avril 2026
Retenu à l'audience de la chambre du conseil du 29/04/2026 où siégeaient : Mme Béatrix Peret, présidente, M. Olivier Dubois, juge, M.
Source officielleAudience publique de vacation
6a0f1147cdc6046d4771db51
29 avril 2026
29 avril 2026
Retenu à l'audience de la chambre du conseil du 29/04/2026 où siégeaient : Mme Béatrix Peret, présidente, M. Olivier Dubois, juge, M.
Source officielleChambre 2-4
6a182c46cdc6046d473a7bb1
13 mai 2026
13 mai 2026
Retenu à l'audience de la chambre du conseil du 13/05/2026 où siégeaient : Mme Béatrix Peret, président, M. Vincent-Bruno Larger, juge, M.
Source officielleCASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG
ECLI:CEDH:001-242933
1 avril 2025
1 avril 2025
This request was rejected by INPS in July 2018, because lodged out of time, according to Section 14 paragraph 1 of Law no.
Source officielleCASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG
ECLI:CEDH:001-231319
1 février 2024
1 février 2024
He claimed 40,000 euros (EUR) for non-pecuniary damage and EUR 120,000 for pecuniary damage which he had allegedly incurred because of the erasure.
Source officielleChambre 2-4
69d4ffe2cdc6046d4766956d
2 juillet 2025
2 juillet 2025
Retenu à l'audience de la chambre du conseil du 02/07/2025 où siégeaient : Mme Béatrix Peret, président, M. Olivier Duboureau, juge, M.
Source officielleCASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG
ECLI:CEDH:001-164431
30 mai 2016
30 mai 2016
On 22 June 2007 the Ministry refused the registration because the applicants had failed to amend the charter in accordance with its previous recommendations on the requirements for membership.
Source officielleCASELAW;DECISIONS;DECCOMMISSION;ENG
ECLI:CE:ECHR:1970:0724DEC000426069
24 juillet 1970
24 juillet 1970
The Court found that the applicant was not excused by the newspaper report on a decision of the Federal Constitutional Court, because, according to this decision, the permission to lodge an appeal out
Source officielleCASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITYCOM;ENG
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2019:0226DEC002827015
26 février 2019
26 février 2019
It further found that there was no need to refer the case to the Constitutional Court because the latter had already decided a similar matter in its decision of 11 November 2014 (see Merkantil Car Zrt.
Source officielleCASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG
ECLI:CEDH:001-178536
16 octobre 2017
16 octobre 2017
However, the proceedings had become prolonged because of the need for expert opinions and the state of health of several of the accused.
Source officielleCASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITY;ENG
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2001:1206DEC005359499
6 décembre 2001
6 décembre 2001
The applicant’s lawyer refused to resume the hearing on 5 April 1996 because he had to appear before another court, and on 23 April 1996 because he was engaged in a pre-election meeting of his party
Source officielleCASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITY;ENG
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2005:0630DEC006680201
30 juin 2005
30 juin 2005
After the trial, on 20 December 1999, the applicant asked the court to correct the hearing record because his request to call V. and G. had been omitted from it.
Source officielleCASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG
ECLI:CEDH:001-207453
9 décembre 2020
9 décembre 2020
On 6 October 2019 the police concluded that there was no offence to investigate because A. denied threatening the applicant with a knife and because witnesses could not be identified. 14.
Source officielleCASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG
ECLI:CEDH:001-119180
2 avril 2013
2 avril 2013
On 19 March 2012 the applicant asked the Bacău Prison warden to place him in an individual cell because he had received several death threats and he feared for his life.
Source officielleCASELAW;DECISIONS;DECCOMMISSION;ENG
ECLI:CE:ECHR:1995:0704DEC002538794
4 juillet 1995
4 juillet 1995
In addition to the above facts, the applicants stated that, upon return to Syria, they risk imprisonment and execution because of the husband's political activities and because they, after having received
Source officielleCASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITY;ENG
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2005:0830DEC006700601
30 août 2005
30 août 2005
The court heard the case in the applicant’s absence because she had failed to attend the hearing. The judgment was served on the applicant on 28 November 2000. COMPLAINTS 1.
Source officielleCASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG
ECLI:CEDH:001-224024
10 mars 2023
10 mars 2023
According to that decision, it was not necessary that the applicant be heard because the findings of the medical commission were sufficient to justify her compulsory admission in the psychiatric ward.
Source officiellePage 32 sur 1524
Beccaria
02/07/2026
Voir →
BECCARI, Marie, Christine
16/06/2026
Voir →
BECCARIA, Pascale, ANGIONI
immatriculation suite à transfert de l'établissement principal hors ressort.
17/03/2026
Voir →
FREDERIC BECCARIA CONSEIL
08/03/2026
Voir →
SOCIETE CIVILE DE PARTICIPATION FINANCIERE EVELYNE BECCARIA
27/01/2026
Voir →