CodexAI
AND
OR
NOT
"…"
DÉCISION / ECLI
TYPE
DATE
EXTRAIT
CASELAW;JUDGMENTS;CHAMBER;ENG
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2022:1215JUD000563116
15 décembre 2022
Merits The parties’ submissions 31 .
Page 45 sur 145
Pôle 4 - Chambre 9 - B
69d8962ecdc6046d47bc1cca
9 avril 2026
1] [Localité 1] non comparante INTIMÉS [Localité 2] SERVICE SOLUTIONS ALTERNATIVES [Adresse 2] [Adresse 3] [Localité 3] non comparante [1] AG SIEGE SOCIAL DRC [Adresse 4] [Localité
comm
ECLI:FR:CCASS:2015:CO00129
10 février 2015
garde à l'égard de son client, sauf à démontrer le caractère averti de ce dernier ; que les consorts X... exposaient qu'ils n'étaient pas les auteurs du projet d'assignation, rédigé par l'Aacab et adressé
CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG
ECLI:CEDH:001-164551
10 juin 2016
The court emphasised that each case would be fact-sensitive and would fall for consideration on its own merits.
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2018:0911JUD000616913
11 septembre 2018
Sweden (revision – merits), 30 July 1998, § 25, Reports of Judgments and Decisions 1998 ‑ VI).
CASELAW;DECISIONS;DECCOMMISSION;ENG
ECLI:CE:ECHR:1997:0702DEC002878795
2 juillet 1997
The letter was sent to the applicant's last known address. However, it later transpired that he had in fact left this address.
cr
61372566cd5801467741d607
31 mai 1995
et le numéro de l'amende forfaitaire, ainsi que l'article du Code de la route applicable (pour la contravention du 7 juillet 1991 ceux du Code des assurances), puis ajoute "pour voir statuer sur le mérite
61372566cd5801467741d608
6137257ecd5801467741e3e4
10 mai 1994
, premier substitut de M. le procureur de la République ; "alors que, d'une part, l'exploit de citation ou de signification doit contenir la désignation du requérant, la date, les nom, prénom et adresse
5e chambre civile
69fad14ccdc6046d47bf8018
5 mai 2026
, avocat postulant et plaidant INTIMEES : Syndicat de copropriétaires de la [Adresse 1] pris en la personne de son administrateur provisoire la SELARL SAINT RAPT, [Adresse 2] [Adresse 1]
CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITY;ENG
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2001:0111DEC004386298
11 janvier 2001
In an order of 4 February 1997 the judge declared the appeal admissible and decided that it should not be heard by the appellate court until a decision had been given on the merits of the case.
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2011:0215DEC001787306
15 février 2011
In its decision the Supreme Court allegedly did not address the issues raised by the applicant’s lawyer. A copy of the decision was not given to the applicant’s lawyer.
CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITYCOM;ENG
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2014:1209DEC007520111
9 décembre 2014
Subsequently, the case was decided on the merits by the District Court, which on 22 October 2008 rejected the applicant’s claim, after a hearing where the applicant and witnesses were heard.
CASELAW;JUDGMENTS;COMMITTEE;ENG
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2023:0216JUD000721813
16 février 2023
Both courts merely reiterated the first-instance court’s findings and did not address the numerous complaints made by the applicant concerning the various defects in the trial, summarily rejecting those
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2025:0211JUD003458216
11 février 2025
In doing so, the courts used standard wording, merely repeating the grounds for detention which had been listed in their initial pre ‑ trial detention decisions. 5.
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2023:0613JUD005720221
13 juin 2023
Such a situation, which did not merely involve inconveniences for the child ordinarily linked to her return, would be intolerable. 8 .
ECLI:CE:ECHR:1996:0626DEC002666495
26 juin 1996
The Registrar made the order and gave the official receiver leave to serve the applicant at his address in Alderney, Guernsey.
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2024:1024JUD005819516
24 octobre 2024
Merits 16.
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2022:0707DEC004002609
7 juillet 2022
The Government argued that the applicant had not lived in the house, and that he had merely been formally registered as residing at that address. 22.
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2010:1130DEC004767209
30 novembre 2010
In those cases, correspondence of persons deprived of their liberty shall be sent to the addressee without delay and shall not be censored.”