The binding effect of a conviction was justified by the fact that in such a case a criminal court had established the accused’s responsibility and guilt.

attaqué (Rennes, 24 avril 2014), que, en 2002, la société Clin d'oeil a entrepris l'aménagement de locaux à usage de parfumerie, sous la maîtrise d'oeuvre de la société Capital création ; que la société Guillo

C..., représenté par Me Guillier, demande au juge des référés, sur le fondement de l’article L. 521-1 du code de justice administrative : 1°) de suspendre la décision implicite par laquelle le préfet

B C, représenté par Me Guillier, a demandé au tribunal, le 4 octobre 2023, sur le fondement de l'article L. 911-7 du code de justice administrative qu'il prescrive à la préfète du Val-de-Marne d'adopter

He initially pleaded not guilty. No request was made for an interpreter at the preliminary hearings. At the trial, the applicant changed his plea to guilty.

d'habitation et de la contribution à l'audiovisuel public qui leur ont été assignées dans les rôles de la commune de Gouesnach (29) au titre de l'année 2021 à raison de la propriété d'un immeuble situé 11 Ar Guily

On 14 November 2011 the applicant was found guilty of an administrative offence punishable under Article   20.2   §   1 of the Russian Code of Administrative Offences (“CAO”) (“breach of

;       Application No. 14657/89:15.863,50 Dutch guilders           Application No. 15105/89:13.833,50 Dutch guilders  &#

or is not guilty by reason of insanity.

    On 6 May 2014 the Baku Court of Serious Crimes found the applicants guilty on all counts and sentenced them to various terms of imprisonment. 9.

    On 4 July 2007 the Zagreb Municipal Court ( Općinski sud u Zagrebu ) found the applicant guilty in criminal proceedings concerning domestic violence and neglect and abuse of a minor child

On the same day it found the applicant guilty of the charge brought against him and sentenced him to a fine of 400 Swedish kronor.

  Everyone charged with a criminal offence shall be       presumed innocent until proved guilty according to law."

When questioned on 12   December 2006 in the presence of the lawyer, the applicant denied his guilt and refused to reply to any further questions. 17.

  Procedure in the event of a plea of guilty 31.

Moreover, the courts found the applicant guilty even on a point which had not been raised by the complainant.

          On 9 December 1986, the House of Representatives found the applicant guilty of the publication of a defamatory libel on Mr.

Admissibility criteria;(Art. 35-2-b) Relevant new information;(Art. 35-3-a) Abuse of the right of application;Violation of Article 6 - Right to a fair trial (Article 6-2 - Presumption of innocence;Proved guilty