CodexAI
AND
OR
NOT
"…"
DÉCISION / ECLI
TYPE
DATE
EXTRAIT
CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG
ECLI:CEDH:001-192540
19 mars 2019
The applicant company is the owner of a building complex located in the fenced up area of Famagusta in the “Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus” (“TRNC”).
Page 34 sur 1066
ECLI:CEDH:001-158416
6 octobre 2015
In June 2008 the applicant’s son, Sergey Manukyan, was drafted into the Armenian army. He was assigned to military unit no. 20666 (‘the military unit’) situated in Noravan village, Armenia.
Chambre commerciale
69d5ebb6cdc6046d477bd5a1
7 avril 2026
par Me Yann GARRIGUE de la SELARL LX MONTPELLIER, avocat au barreau de MONTPELLIER, postulant et Me Allan ROY, avocat au barreau de BORDEAUX, plaidant Ordonnance de clôture du 27 janvier 2026 COMPOSITION
CASELAW;JUDGMENTS;CHAMBER;ENG
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2022:0224JUD002431413
24 février 2022
their share in the company.
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2009:0127JUD002618906
27 janvier 2009
The company claimed that the bank was obliged to compensate, inter alia, by reimbursing the purchase price of the shares, the condominium charges paid to the housing corporation and the company’s legal
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2009:0618JUD003598902
18 juin 2009
No further claim was lodged in respect of it by the company or any other person or legal entity.
CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITY;ENG
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2009:0526DEC001263705
26 mai 2009
In its appeal, the applicant company complained, inter alia , that the Tax Authority had been allowed to use selected information from the criminal investigation and that the applicant company had not
soc
ECLI:FR:CCASS:2012:SO01651
4 juillet 2012
X..., engagé à partir du 1er avril 1993 par la banque Bruxelles Lambert France devenue ING Bank France, occupait en dernier lieu les fonctions d'opérateur Salle de marchés ; qu'en 2005, le groupe ING Bank
ECLI:CEDH:001-174309
16 mai 2017
The court held, inter alia , that it was a well-known fact that in Tallinn Prison the sanitary conditions and the conditions of the cells were poor.
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2007:0626DEC000456607
26 juin 2007
He had been offered MTL 107,000 (approximately EUR 256,800) in compensation, which he contested as being inadequate.
Pôle 6 - Chambre 3
6033f290cc9beba3388af36f
28 février 2017
de préavis, 837,50 euros au titre de l'indemnité compensatrice de congés payés, 3.000 euros au titre de l'article 700 du code de procédure civile.
CJUE
ECLI:EU:C:2009:219
2 avril 2009
#Marco Gambazzi prieš DaimlerChrysler Canada Inc. ir CIBC Mellon Trust Company.#Prašymas priimti prejudicinį sprendimą: Corte d'appello di Milano - Italija.
ECLI:CEDH:001-162984
21 avril 2016
As company Yu. had not fulfilled certain conditions stipulated in the agreement, the company, represented by the applicant, sued it before the Odessa Regional Commercial Court ( Господарський суд Одеської
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2010:0511DEC003565808
11 mai 2010
The compensation proceedings were continued in April 2000.
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2002:0829DEC004757801
29 août 2002
It was held, inter alia , that the applicant had benefited from preliminary compensation in respect of his savings pending the launch of the full-scale compensation envisaged in the Savings Act.
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2002:0829DEC006757801
CASELAW;CLIN;ENG
ECLI:CEDH:002-3654
29 novembre 2005
In 1990 the district in question was incorporated into another one, leading to a change of duty station for the applicants and loss of their wage supplements.
CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITYCOM;ENG
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2017:0307DEC003360111
7 mars 2017
The applicant also submitted that the amount of compensation awarded was unjust in view of the fact that in the past the KSG company had offered him PLN 84,000 for the easements (see paragraph 6 above)
Pôle 2 - Chambre 2
61627770a2bc6369e8386cee
13 décembre 2013
Par jugement du 14 mai 2012, le tribunal de grande instance de Paris a condamné le docteur [A] in solidum avec la société Inter Hannover à indemniser les consorts [I] du préjudice subi du fait du décès
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2011:1122DEC002529407
22 novembre 2011
On 9 February 2005 he lodged a civil claim with the Golosiyivskyy District Court of Kyiv (“the District Court”) against the A. company, seeking compensation for non-pecuniary damage caused to him by the