AND · OR · NOT · "…"CodexAI
AND · OR · NOT · "…"DÉCISION / ECLI
TYPE
DATE
EXTRAIT
PRESS;HEARINGS;ENG
ECLI:CEDH:003-2123497-2252835
20 septembre 2007
20 septembre 2007
He also pleaded not guilty. Riga Regional Court found the applicant guilty under Article 68-3 and imposed an immediate six-year custodial sentence.
Source officiellecomm
ECLI:FR:CCASS:2012:CO00879
18 septembre 2012
18 septembre 2012
-A..., la société Guilde immobilière européenne (les débiteurs) ont été mis en redressement puis liquidation judiciaires, M. d'Y...étant désigné liquidateur de la procédure unique ; que la caisse régionale
Source officielleCASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG
ECLI:CEDH:001-229883
30 novembre 2023
30 novembre 2023
In the third set of the proceedings the applicant was found guilty of the failure to comply with the police officer’s lawful order and sentenced to 15 days’ administrative arrest, Art. 6 (1) - and
Source officielleCASELAW;JUDGMENTS;CHAMBER;ENG
ECLI:CE:ECHR:1986:0708JUD000981582
8 juillet 1986
8 juillet 1986
In the author’s opinion, by sheltering behind the philosophic alternative between collective guilt and collective innocence the Austrians had avoided facing up to a real, discernible and assessable guilt
Source officielleCASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITY;ENG
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2003:0304DEC003723597
4 mars 2003
4 mars 2003
Since his guilt could not be established, his evidence also had to be regarded as unreliable in so far as it concerned acts allegedly committed by the applicants.
Source officielleCASELAW;JUDGMENTS;CHAMBER;ENG
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2020:0218JUD000181411
18 février 2020
18 février 2020
The court held further that, since the applicant was guilty of a single act of forgery, the legal classification of her offence had to be changed from continuous acts of forgery to a single
Source officielleCASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITYCOM;ENG
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2017:1010DEC006319609
10 octobre 2017
10 octobre 2017
After examining the applicants’ claims in the light of the available evidence, the court held that the lower courts had correctly established the applicants’ guilt.
Source officielleCASELAW;JUDGMENTS;CHAMBER;ENG
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2015:0602JUD005414510
2 juin 2015
2 juin 2015
Everyone charged with criminal conduct shall be presumed innocent until proven guilty.” 18.
Source officielleCASELAW;DECISIONS;DECCOMMISSION;ENG
ECLI:CE:ECHR:1998:0909DEC003419996
9 septembre 1998
9 septembre 1998
On 18 March 1996 the applicant was found guilty of disobeying an order to go to the MDT room to provide a urine sample as part of the random drug testing programme.
Source officielleCASELAW;DECISIONS;DECCOMMISSION;ENG
ECLI:CE:ECHR:1998:0701DEC003844097
1 juillet 1998
1 juillet 1998
The jury was unable to agree on the third count in relation to Mr G. and the judge entered a not guilty verdict, it being inappropriate to hold a third trial on that issue.
Source officielleCASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITY;ENG
ECLI:CE:ECHR:1998:1215DEC002495294
15 décembre 1998
15 décembre 1998
xa0; On 16 October 1993 the Public Prosecutor attached to the Brindisi District Court requested that the applicant be remanded in custody, on grounds that there was a serious indication of his guilt
Source officielleCASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITYCOM;ENG
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2018:0410DEC003810605
10 avril 2018
10 avril 2018
The applicant retracted his previous statements and denied his guilt. He requested a confidential meeting with his lawyer, Ms V., before the interview but this was refused.
Source officielleCASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITY;ENG
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2002:1126DEC004432098
26 novembre 2002
26 novembre 2002
Everyone charged with a criminal offence shall be presumed innocent until proved guilty according to law.”
Source officielleCASELAW;JUDGMENTS;CHAMBER;ENG
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2015:0205JUD000568206
5 février 2015
5 février 2015
Federation, a judge cannot be held liable for an expression of opinion in the course of the administration of justice or for the judgment handed down [by him or her] unless he or she has been found guilty
Source officielleCASELAW;DECISIONS;DECCOMMISSION;ENG
ECLI:CE:ECHR:1967:1219DEC000260465
19 décembre 1967
19 décembre 1967
Detention pending trial constituted a "special sacrifice" ("Sonderopfer") which an individual, whether guilty or not, had to make for the maintenance of an effective administration of justice.
Source officielleCASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITY;ENG
ECLI:CE:ECHR:1999:0511DEC003966198
11 mai 1999
11 mai 1999
The applicant pleaded not guilty and was tried in Plymouth Crown Court before a judge and jury.
Source officielleCASELAW;REPORTS;ENG
ECLI:CE:ECHR:1995:0905REP002210793
5 septembre 1995
5 septembre 1995
He pleaded guilty to the former and not guilty to the latter charge.
Source officielleCASELAW;JUDGMENTS;CHAMBER;ENG
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2014:0211JUD006912210
11 février 2014
11 février 2014
The court noted that in the civil proceedings the applicant had not been found guilty of any crime.
Source officielleCASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITY;ENG
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2000:1205DEC003557497
5 décembre 2000
5 décembre 2000
or is not guilty by reason of insanity.
Source officielleCASELAW;CLIN;ENG
ECLI:CEDH:002-2523
27 septembre 2007
27 septembre 2007
The court of appeal considered, on the basis of the principle that any reasonable doubt must benefit the accused ( in dubio pro reo) , that the applicant’s guilt had not been established.
Source officiellePage 43 sur 692