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 · "…"
RechercheDécisionsCodesCPHAlertes
Exporter CSV

2 010 résultats pour « Pierre Awad »

TousCCCETACAACACPHTJTCOMCJUEPrud'h.Conv. coll.BOFIP IA

DÉCISION / ECLI

TYPE

DATE

EXTRAIT

CE

CASELAW;JUDGMENTS;CHAMBER;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:2015:0616JUD008126012

Admin. suprême

16 juin 2015

16 juin 2015

T.K. stated that he had not participated in the fight, and had attempted to pull K.K. away. He had not seen who had started it. 10.

Page 43 sur 101

← PrécédentSuivant →
Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITY;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:2002:1212DEC000198802

Admin. suprême

12 décembre 2002

12 décembre 2002

With regard to this last piece of information, the authority stated that it was a matter for individual conscience and was therefore not essential for the determination of identity.

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITY;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:2010:1207DEC000552708

Admin. suprême

7 décembre 2010

7 décembre 2010

    They saw Mr Bennett from their vehicle as he was walking away from them and up a pedestrian ramp to the flats. He matched the description they had been given.

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;JUDGMENTS;CHAMBER;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:2012:0626JUD004307106

Admin. suprême

26 juin 2012

26 juin 2012

    The applicants stated that both pieces of legislation referred to by the Government did not apply in their case. 49.

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG

ECLI:CEDH:001-171225

Admin. suprême

17 janvier 2017

17 janvier 2017

She only wrote a report, or to be precise, scribbled something on a piece of paper that was not signed by any of the commission members.

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;JUDGMENTS;CHAMBER;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:2012:0710JUD003693108

Admin. suprême

10 juillet 2012

10 juillet 2012

proceedings under the Extra-Judicial Rehabilitations Act 1991 was not capable of undermining the conclusion the Supreme Court had reached in the proceedings under consideration governed by a different piece

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;JUDGMENTS;COMMITTEE;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:2023:0914JUD004464617

Admin. suprême

14 septembre 2023

14 septembre 2023

    In the circumstances of the present case, the Court is sensitive to the applicant’s arguments, supported by pieces of evidence, that his conditions of stay in the red Cross Centre were far

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITYCOM;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:2026:0507DEC002184621

Admin. suprême

7 mai 2026

7 mai 2026

There had been no explanation why fast-food establishments selling take-away hot beverages had been exempted while traditional-style cafes had not.

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;JUDGMENTS;CHAMBER;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:2025:1021JUD001675624

Admin. suprême

21 octobre 2025

21 octobre 2025

    The Court, having regard to the documents before it, awards the applicant EUR 5,400 in respect of pecuniary damage.

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;JUDGMENTS;CHAMBER;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:2020:1006JUD005246415

Admin. suprême

6 octobre 2020

6 octobre 2020

    The Government submitted that no award should be made to the applicant, discerning no interference with the applicant’s possessions. 67.

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;JUDGMENTS;CHAMBER;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:2003:0522JUD004166698

Admin. suprême

22 mai 2003

22 mai 2003

Making an assessment on an equitable basis, it decides to award the first applicant EUR 20,000 and the second applicant EUR 10,000 for the non-pecuniary damage sustained. B.

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;JUDGMENTS;CHAMBER;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:2008:1209JUD000504702

Admin. suprême

9 décembre 2008

9 décembre 2008

Nevertheless, even a confession repeated in court cannot on its own be regarded as a decisive piece of evidence unless supported by additional evidence. THE LAW I.

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;JUDGMENTS;CHAMBER;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:2016:1124JUD003568811

Admin. suprême

24 novembre 2016

24 novembre 2016

    When interviewed, S.S., K.S.’s sister, stated that she had been aware of some problems between her brother and a friend of the applicant.

Source officielle
CE

PRESS;CHAMBERJUDGMENTS;ENG

ECLI:CEDH:003-644711-650342

Admin. suprême

5 novembre 2002

5 novembre 2002

  On 17 November 1989 she asked the Supreme Court of Cyprus to declare the decisions to take away part of her land and to use that piece of land for the construction of a public road, void and without

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;JUDGMENTS;COMMITTEE;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:2020:0507JUD004804009

Admin. suprême

7 mai 2020

7 mai 2020

He had been aware that his brother had taken stolen goods to Kyiv, where he had proceeded to sell them.

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;JUDGMENTS;COMMITTEE;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:2018:0315JUD005147212

Admin. suprême

15 mars 2018

15 mars 2018

Having regard to Rule 60, the Court therefore makes no award under Article 41 of the Convention. FOR THESE REASONS, THE COURT, UNANIMOUSLY, 1.

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;JUDGMENTS;COMMITTEE;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:2025:0424JUD002581912

Admin. suprême

24 avril 2025

24 avril 2025

    The Government considered that in the absence of a violation no award was to be made. 31.

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;JUDGMENTS;COMMITTEE;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:2022:0222JUD006621212

Admin. suprême

22 février 2022

22 février 2022

The Court is not convinced that the District Court’s arguments supplied to justify the refusal to admit a key piece of evidence was adequate and sufficient.

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG

ECLI:CEDH:001-118892

Admin. suprême

25 mars 2013

25 mars 2013

It held that the property in question had been taken away from the applicant’s predecessor before 25 February 1948 and therefore the restitution legislation did not apply.

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;JUDGMENTS;CHAMBER;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:2025:1016JUD004830321

Admin. suprême

16 octobre 2025

16 octobre 2025

The accused will also be asked whether he or she is aware of the consequences of his or her actions.

Source officielle