CodexAI
AND
OR
NOT
"…"
DÉCISION / ECLI
TYPE
DATE
EXTRAIT
CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG
ECLI:CEDH:001-180591
8 janvier 2018
The court referred to Rule 6.11 of the Rules of 1986 (known as VNTP 3-85), approved by Order of the Oil Ministry of Azerbaijan (apparently referring to the Ministry of the Petroleum Industry of the former
Page 39 sur 2215
CASELAW;JUDGMENTS;CHAMBER;ENG
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2014:0722JUD005516711
22 juillet 2014
75 § 4 of the Rules of Court.
ECLI:CEDH:001-114380
16 décembre 2010
Rules of Court.
CASELAW;JUDGMENTS;COMMITTEE;ENG
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2024:0620JUD004165516
20 juin 2024
Jadrijević Mladar, and to declare the remainder of the application inadmissible; the decision to give priority to the application (Rule 41 of the Rules of Court); the decision by the Government
CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITYCOM;ENG
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2019:1022DEC005412716
22 octobre 2019
62 § 2 of the Rules of Court, which reads: Article 39 of the Convention “1.
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2018:0227JUD003534616
27 février 2018
APPLICATION OF AN INTERIM MEASURE UNDER RULE 39 OF THE RULES OF COURT 26.
CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITY;ENG
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2007:0220DEC003586603
20 février 2007
Rule 36 of the Rules of Court, as relevant, reads: “1.
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2007:1218JUD003585304
18 décembre 2007
They accordingly requested revision of the judgment within the meaning of Rule 80 § 1 of the Rules of Court. 4.
CASELAW;DECISIONS;DECCOMMISSION;ENG
ECLI:CE:ECHR:1986:0718DEC001191386
18 juillet 1986
As regards exhaustion of domestic remedies, the mere fact that the applicant has brought a constitutional complaint does not of itself constitute compliance with this rule.
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2006:0523DEC000726005
23 mai 2006
Dollé , Section Registrar , Having regard to the above application lodged on 14 February 2005, Having regard to the interim measure indicated to the respondent Government under Rule 39 of the Rules of
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2010:0119DEC002028309
19 janvier 2010
39 of the Rules of Court and the fact that this interim measure has been complied with, Having regard to the decision to grant priority to the above application under Rule 41 of the Rules of Court, Having
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2015:0324DEC000236003
24 mars 2015
Application of Rule 43 § 4 of the Rules of Court 11.
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2006:0404DEC001718504
4 avril 2006
Dollé , Section Registrar , Having regard to the above application lodged on 7 May 2004, Having regard to the interim measure indicated to the respondent Government under Rule 39 of the Rules of
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2008:0513DEC000268304
13 mai 2008
39 of the Rules of Court, Having regard to the decision to grant priority to the above application under Rule 41 of the Rules of Court, Having regard to the observations submitted by the respondent Government
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2019:0416JUD002685606
16 avril 2019
They argued that the event in question constituted a new fact within the meaning of Rule 80 § 1 of the Rules of Court.
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2000:0711JUD002897195
11 juillet 2000
; 62 § 3 of the Rules of Court). 12.
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2008:0131DEC001520404
31 janvier 2008
39 of the Rules of Court, Having regard to the decision to grant priority to the above application under Rule 41 of the Rules of Court, Having deliberated, decides as follows: THE FACTS The applicant,
ECLI:CE:ECHR:1999:0525DEC004648399
25 mai 1999
It alleged, inter alia , that as Rule 21 of the Fund’s internal Rules contained an arbitration clause, the matter fell outside the ordinary courts’ jurisdiction.
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2011:0920JUD006454101
20 septembre 2011
They accordingly requested revision of the judgment within the meaning of Rule 80 of the Rules of Court. 5.
CASELAW;CLIN;ENG
ECLI:CEDH:002-6211
6 février 2003
The Turkish authorities ordered the applicants’ extradition one day after the Court had adopted an interim measure under Rule 39 of the Rules of Court indicating that it was desirable in the interests