On 13 January 2020 the Lisbon Court of Appeal upheld the District Court’s judgment.

The public prosecutor, joined by X, charged the applicant before the Vaasa District Court ( käräjäoikeus, tingsrätt ) on two counts of intentional defamation.

However, it appeared that the first had died in the course of the proceedings. The latter responded to the court’s email that he did not know the applicant and refused to testify.

Court”).

  Additionally, the domestic courts became aware of the European Court’s jurisprudence and they constantly applied the principles set in respect of the rights protected by Article 5 of the Convention

    On 11 November 2011 the applicant lodged an appeal, arguing in particular that the trial court had failed to establish a link between the pieces of evidence and the defendants, thereby falling

When the amount of the damage is an element of the offence, the criminal court’s findings as to that amount are binding on the court which rules on the civil claim.

AU NOM DU PEUPLE FRANCAIS LA COUR DE CASSATION, CHAMBRE CRIMINELLE, en son audience publique tenue au Palais de Justice à PARIS, le vingt-deux janvier deux mille trois, a rendu l'arrêt suivant :

    Second retrial of the applicant's case On 10   July 1984 the Saarbrücken Court of Appeal (Seventh Senate) amended the Regional Court's decision of 21   March 1975.

The domestic courts had found this to be untrue. The Government referred to the Court’s judgment in Lindon, Otchakovsky-Laurens and July v.

  However, the Court unanimously found that there had been no violation in respect of the High Court’s omission to communicate the complete case file to the applicants personally after their lawyer

The journalists’ pre-trial detention was ordered by an interlocutory judgment delivered by the Cluj County Court on the same day.

This court accepts the [applicant company’s] argument that the Constitutional Court’s decision no. U-III-3471/03 of 16   March 2006, relied on by the defendants, is not binding for this court.

The Court considers that the Constitutional Court’s decision of 21 July 2015 (paragraph 18 above) cannot be considered to have created a “possession” within the meaning of Article 1 of Protocol No. 1,

The Polish embassy asked the appellate court to uphold the Vilnius Regional Court’s decision. 17.

by those judgments, if need be before a court and ultimately before the Constitutional Court.

AU NOM DU PEUPLE FRANCAIS LA COUR DE CASSATION, CHAMBRE SOCIALE, a rendu l'arrêt suivant : Sur le pourvoi formé par M.

; que la cour d'appel, pour relever l'existence d'indices permettant de caractériser le préjudice de la société [...], a estimé que les pièces produites par cette société permettaient de démontrer une

(pièce II 2) ; que le président du conseil d'administration de la SA SCBSM est Pierre-Christophe Y...