The Court’s established case-law sets out three criteria, commonly known as the “ Engel criteria” (see Engel and Others v. the Netherlands , 8   June 1976, Series A no. 22), to be considered

    The Court’s established case-law sets out three criteria, commonly known as the “ Engel criteria” (see Engel and Others v. the Netherlands , 8   June 1976, Series A no. 22), to be considered

The Court’s established case-law sets out three criteria, commonly known as the “Engel criteria”, to be considered in determining whether or not there was a “criminal charge” (see Engel and Others v.

    The Court’s established case-law sets out three criteria, commonly known as the “Engel criteria” (see Engel and Others v. the Netherlands , 8   June 1976, Series A no. 22), to be considered

    The Court’s established case-law sets out three criteria, commonly known as the “Engel criteria” (see Engel and Others v. the Netherlands , 8   June 1976, Series A no. 22), to be considered

Conclusion : Etat défendeur tenu de verser au requérant une certaine somme pour frais et dépens (unanimité). références à la jurisprudence de la cour 8.6.1976, Engel et autres c.

Convention in cases such as the present one, the Court must bear in mind the particular characteristics of military life and its effects on the situation of individual members of the armed forces (see the Engel

Convention in cases such as the present one, the Court must bear in mind the particular characteristics of military life and its effects on the situation of individual members of the armed forces (see the Engel

La sanction n’entraînait par ailleurs pas un préjudice suffisamment important pour faire relever la procédure de la matière pénale (voir, par exemple, l’arrêt Engel et autres c.

Convention in cases such as the present one, the Court must bear in mind the particular characteristics of military life and its effects on the situation of individual members of the armed forces (see the Engel

    In the light of the Engel criteria (see Engel and Others v. the Netherlands , 8   June   1976, §§ 82-83, Series A no. 22), the Court considers that the facts of the present applications

    The Court’s established case-law sets out three criteria, commonly known as the “Engel criteria” (see Engel and Others v. the Netherlands , 8   June 1976, Series A no. 22), to be considered

Convention in cases such as the present one, the Court must bear in mind the particular characteristics of military life and its effects on the situation of individual members of the armed forces (see the Engel

2. «   But légitime   » La Cour estime que l’ingérence dénoncée a manifestement été prise en vue de défendre l’ordre dans les forces armées, but légitime aux fins de l’article 10 § 2 (voir Engel

Convention in cases such as the present one, the Court must bear in mind the particular characteristics of military life and its effects on the situation of individual members of the armed forces (see Engel

        The Government submit, with reference to the judgment of Engel and others (see Eur.

Convention in cases such as the present one, the Court must bear in mind the particular characteristics of military life and its effects on the situation of individual members of the armed forces (see the Engel

       As to the question of whether the proceedings determined a "criminal charge", the Government submit that the criteria first set out in the Engel case (Eur.

In doing so, it examined whether the surcharge proceedings were “criminal” within the autonomous meaning of the Article, and to this end relied on three criteria, commonly known as the “ Engel criteria