Because of the seriousness of her crimes, and because the presence of her family members in Austria could not deter her from repeatedly committing offences, the exclusion order was proportionate to the

Lastly, she argued that a complaint for a violation of the right to be heard would have been unreasonably difficult because of the short statutory time-limit of two weeks, because of a lack of success

    On 8 May 2012 the applicant was withdrawn from unpaid work in prison because of his deteriorating health. 14 .

Two hearings scheduled in July 2001 were adjourned because certain procedural shortcomings had to be rectified and because the victims and witnesses did not appear.

barreau de TOULOUSE, avocat plaidant, vestiaire : 321 DEFENDEURS Organisme CAISSE PRIMAIRE ASSURANCE MALADIE DE HAUTE GARONNE, dont le siège social est sis [Adresse 2] représentée par Maître Sandrine BEZARD

La SCI du Théâtre a confié la maîtrise d'oeuvre de la reconstruction à la société Begard, laquelle a confié les travaux d'agencement à la société Arome, entreprise générale de bâtiment.

he did not exhaust domestic remedies, in accordance with the generally recognised rules of international law, or because he did not observe the six months' rule.

THE LAW On 20 October 2003 the Government indicated that the application was not fit for examination by this Court because the proceedings were still pending before the domestic courts.

She complained that the HBRB had acted unlawfully because it had failed to make adequate findings of fact or provide sufficient reasons for its decision.

    The applicant has been prevented from returning to his home and property because the Turkish military authorities have continuously occupied and used his home.

because of his failure to appear before the court.

It was held by the Regional Court that there were no reasons to mitigate the sentence, because the applicant had not suffered any concrete disadvantage as a result of that period having been exceeded.

On 26 June 2012 the applicant was detained in Gherla Prison because he was suspected of attempted murder.

The court found that because of the applicant’s inactivity, her property rights had not been restored.

It held that the procedural law did not allow it to go into the merits because a cross-appeal seeking a different, favourable outcome on other grounds was missing.

de la SELARL BECRIT-GLONDU Noëlle, avocats au barreau de NÎMES Bénéficiaire à l'aide juridictionnelle totale suivant décision n° C-30189-2025-006799 en date du 06 octobre 2025 rendue par le bureau d'aide

E A B, représenté par Me Béchard, demande au juge des référés, sur le fondement de l'article L. 521-1 du code de justice administrative : 1°) de suspendre l'exécution de l'arrêté du 20 novembre 2023

On 19 September 2001 the Constitutional Court declared the complaint inadmissible because it was not filed against a final decision.

He claimed to be harassed in the DRC because of his political activities.