CodexAI
AND
OR
NOT
"…"
DÉCISION / ECLI
TYPE
DATE
EXTRAIT
CASELAW;JUDGMENTS;CHAMBER;ENG
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2010:1221JUD002757003
21 décembre 2010
It is impossible to state what the outcome of the proceedings would have been had the trial court taken steps to obtain the evidence which the applicant sought to adduce; but the Court attaches
Page 48 sur 194
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2016:0428JUD002010613
28 avril 2016
The child, who appeared to have developed properly in relation to her age, had given the impression that she knew what was at stake and what she wanted.
CASELAW;JUDGMENTS;GRANDCHAMBER;ENG
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2016:0426JUD006264910
26 avril 2016
Relying on examples taken from speeches by the head of the RAD, they submitted that it was a matter exclusively for followers of the Alevi faith, and not for a State body, to determine what should be regarded
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2017:0321JUD000068612
21 mars 2017
The applicant complained that he had been deprived of adequate medical treatment while in Kielce Remand Centre and that his state of health had deteriorated while he had been in detention
CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG
ECLI:CEDH:001-155944
11 juin 2015
He regularly attended psychotherapy sessions with So. and did not commit any criminal offences while at liberty.
CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITY;ENG
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2009:1110DEC002142506
10 novembre 2009
Belgium , 18 November 1970, § 50, Series A no. 12), while also answering the need to leave the applicant time to decide whether to apply to the Court and to prepare his application.
ECLI:CEDH:001-167134
8 septembre 2016
Her poor state of health and her inability to participate in the trial formed the basis for that decision. 10.
CASELAW;JUDGMENTS;COMMITTEE;ENG
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2019:0117JUD003324813
17 janvier 2019
must be assessed in the light of the circumstances of the case and with reference to the following criteria: the complexity of the case, the conduct of the applicants and the relevant authorities and what
ECLI:CEDH:001-191100
25 janvier 2019
margin-bottom:6pt; text-indent:14.2pt } Communicated on 25 January 2019 FOURTH SECTION Application no. 66753/11 Valeriy Stanislavovich MELNIKOV against Ukraine lodged on 12 October 2011 STATEMENT
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2019:0307JUD005458915
7 mars 2019
must be assessed in the light of the circumstances of the case and with reference to the following criteria: the complexity of the case, the conduct of the applicant and the relevant authorities and what
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2019:0606JUD001201615
6 juin 2019
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2020:0206JUD001784319
6 février 2020
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2020:0305JUD004502813
5 mars 2020
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2020:0716JUD005223418
16 juillet 2020
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2019:1219JUD008114217
19 décembre 2019
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2018:0111JUD006653411
11 janvier 2018
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2017:1109JUD001581313
9 novembre 2017
ECLI:CEDH:001-152796
10 février 2015
On 26 June 2004 the claimant received a writ of enforcement and asked the bailiff to start the execution proceedings (case no. I KM 2317/04).
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2021:0722JUD000796220
22 juillet 2021
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2021:0722JUD004638220