CodexAI

par KI

Workspace

Toutes les décisions2.7M+Récentes

Judiciaires

Cour de CassationCour d'AppelTribunal JudiciaireTrib. de Commerce

Administratives

Conseil d'ÉtatCour Admin. d'AppelTrib. Administratif

Codes de loi

Code civilCode du travailCode de commerceCode pénalCode procédure civileCGICode sécu. socialeCode de l'urbanismeCode de l'enviro.Code monétaire fin.

Droit social

Prud'hommes19KConventions coll.26KDoctrine fiscale14K

IA & Outils

IA JuridiqueNEWVeille hebdoNEWMCP ServerAPICitationsStatistiquesAlertes
ConnexionS'inscrire

CodexAI

RechercheJurisprudenceCodesCitationsStatistiquesAlertes
Juridiction
Tri
DeÀ
Avocat
Opérateurs : AND · OR · NOT · "…"
Exporter CSV
RechercheDécisionsCodesCPHAlertes

2 521 résultats pour « Isabelle THIER »

TousCCCETACAACACPHTJTCOMCJUEPrud'h.Conv. coll.BOFIP IA

DÉCISION / ECLI

TYPE

DATE

EXTRAIT

CE

CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITYCOM;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:2012:0918DEC001629808

Admin. suprême

18 septembre 2012

18 septembre 2012

He was represented before the Court by Mr   B.   Yavuz, a lawyer practising in Ankara. The Turkish Government (“the Government”) were represented by their Agent.

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITYCOM;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:2012:0320DEC000176908

Admin. suprême

20 mars 2012

20 mars 2012

He was represented before the Court by Ms   Z.   Aşçıoğlu, a lawyer practising in Ankara. The Turkish Government (“the Government”) were represented by their Agent.

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITYCOM;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:2012:0214DEC000261305

Admin. suprême

14 février 2012

14 février 2012

He is represented before the Court by Mr İ. Kartal and Mr F. Polat, lawyers practising in Van. The Turkish Government (“the Government”) were represented by their Agent.

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITYCOM;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:2012:0214DEC004329908

Admin. suprême

14 février 2012

14 février 2012

The Turkish Government (“the Government”) were represented by their Agent.

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITYCOM;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:2012:0918DEC004857110

Admin. suprême

18 septembre 2012

18 septembre 2012

The Turkish Government (“the Government”) were represented by their Agent. The application mainly concerns the excessive length of the criminal proceedings against the applicant.

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITYCOM;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:2012:0510DEC002724109

Admin. suprême

10 mai 2012

10 mai 2012

He is represented before the Court by Mr   Ü.   Parlak, a lawyer practising in Hatay. The Turkish Government (“the Government”) were represented by their Agent.

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITYCOM;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:2012:0510DEC002670809

Admin. suprême

10 mai 2012

10 mai 2012

He is represented before the Court by Mr   Ü.   Parlak, a lawyer practising in Hatay. The Turkish Government (“the Government”) were represented by their Agent.

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITYCOM;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:2012:0918DEC005226607

Admin. suprême

18 septembre 2012

18 septembre 2012

The Turkish Government (“the Government”) were represented by their Agent.

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITY;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:2009:0331DEC000436404

Admin. suprême

31 mars 2009

31 mars 2009

the facts giving rise to this application against an undertaking by the Government to pay him 3,500 euros (EUR).

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITYCOM;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:2012:0214DEC000907609

Admin. suprême

14 février 2012

14 février 2012

The applicants in cases nos.   9076/09 and 9088/09 also invoked Article 6 of the Convention in this respect.

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITY;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:2009:1020DEC000459206

Admin. suprême

20 octobre 2009

20 octobre 2009

On the 10 June 2009 Court decided to communicate the applicants’ complaint concerning the lengthy non-enforcement of final judgment given in their favour.

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITY;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:2010:0223DEC005170907

Admin. suprême

23 février 2010

23 février 2010

The last decision in this respect, rendered by the Skopje Court of Appeal on 17 May 2007, was served on the applicant on 29   May   2007.

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITY;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:2008:0401DEC000058404

Admin. suprême

1 avril 2008

1 avril 2008

The applicants did not wish to use this remedy maintaining that they had turned to the Ministry of Justice on 15 February 2006 claiming the compensation in respect of their expenses but, on 30 August 2006

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITYCOM;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:2011:0125DEC001199306

Admin. suprême

25 janvier 2011

25 janvier 2011

The Macedonian Government (“the Government”) were represented by their Agent, R. Lazareska Gerovska.

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITYCOM;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:2012:0605DEC001897909

Admin. suprême

5 juin 2012

5 juin 2012

She was represented before the Court by Mr   M.   Erbil, a lawyer practising in İstanbul. The Turkish Government (“the Government”) were represented by their Agent.

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITYCOM;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:2012:0522DEC000370409

Admin. suprême

22 mai 2012

22 mai 2012

The Turkish Government (“the Government”) were represented by their Agent.

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITY;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:2009:1013DEC000643907

Admin. suprême

13 octobre 2009

13 octobre 2009

In its view, this amount would constitute adequate redress and sufficient compensation for the impugned length of the said proceedings, and thus a reasonable sum as to quantum in the present case in the

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;JUDGMENTS;CHAMBER;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:2013:0404JUD003543005

Admin. suprême

4 avril 2013

4 avril 2013

In their estimate this was the current market price of a flat at Znamenka equal to the expropriated one. They arrived at that amount by consulting estate agents’ offers on the Internet. 12.

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITYCOM;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:2012:0904DEC006015110

Admin. suprême

4 septembre 2012

4 septembre 2012

The court held that although the military doctors at the regiment infirmary and Elazığ Military Hospital had clearly failed in their diagnosis and delayed the applicant’s access to treatment, this shortcoming

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITY;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:2008:1104DEC001812705

Admin. suprême

4 novembre 2008

4 novembre 2008

All the applicants are Ukrainian nationals. The Ukrainian Government (“the Government”) are represented by their Agent, Mr Y. Zaytsev.

Source officielle

Page 4 sur 127

← PrécédentSuivant →