CodexAI

par KI

Workspace

Toutes les décisions2.7M+Récentes

Judiciaires

Cour de CassationCour d'AppelTribunal JudiciaireTrib. de Commerce

Administratives

Conseil d'ÉtatCour Admin. d'AppelTrib. Administratif

Codes de loi

Code civilCode du travailCode de commerceCode pénalCode procédure civileCGICode sécu. socialeCode de l'urbanismeCode de l'enviro.Code monétaire fin.

Droit social

Prud'hommes19KConventions coll.26KDoctrine fiscale14K

IA & Outils

IA JuridiqueNEWVeille hebdoNEWMCP ServerAPICitationsStatistiquesAlertes
ConnexionS'inscrire

CodexAI

RechercheJurisprudenceCodesCitationsStatistiquesAlertes
Juridiction
Tri
DeÀ
Avocat
Opérateurs : AND · OR · NOT · "…"
Exporter CSV
RechercheDécisionsCodesCPHAlertes

29 963 résultats pour « Bechaud »

TousCCCETACAACACPHTJTCOMCJUEPrud'h.Conv. coll.BOFIP IA

DÉCISION / ECLI

TYPE

DATE

EXTRAIT

CE

CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITY;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:2003:1216DEC000950402

Admin. suprême

16 décembre 2003

16 décembre 2003

In this connection they submitted that the applicant did enjoy access to a court because she had instituted civil proceedings for damages before the Zagreb Municipal Court.

Page 49 sur 1499

← PrécédentSuivant →
Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITY;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:2003:1216DEC000951402

Admin. suprême

16 décembre 2003

16 décembre 2003

In this connection they submitted that the applicant did enjoy access to a court because he had instituted civil proceedings for damages before the Zagreb Municipal Court.

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITY;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:2003:1216DEC000972002

Admin. suprême

16 décembre 2003

16 décembre 2003

In this connection they submitted that the applicants did enjoy access to a court because they had instituted civil proceedings for damages before the Varaždin Municipal Court.

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITY;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:2007:0510DEC001733805

Admin. suprême

10 mai 2007

10 mai 2007

The Court considers that it does not have to answer the question of exhaustion of domestic remedies because the application is anyhow inadmissible for the following reasons.

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITY;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:2001:0315DEC005053099

Admin. suprême

15 mars 2001

15 mars 2001

Between September 1993 and June 1994 the applicants were dismissed from their posts because the American base where they used to work closed down.

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;DECISIONS;DECCOMMISSION;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:1987:0304DEC001152385

Admin. suprême

4 mars 1987

4 mars 1987

          This letter was stopped because it contained unventilated complaints.

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITY;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:2003:0923DEC003888502

Admin. suprême

23 septembre 2003

23 septembre 2003

of his work in DSP and for Mobutu, because of his Ngbandi ethnicity and because of his close connections with the family of Mobutu.

Source officielle
CC

civ2

607940d89ba5988459c3f561

Cassation

27 mai 1970

27 mai 1970

SUR LE MOYEN UNIQUE : ATTENDU QU'IL RESULTE DE L'ARRET INFIRMATIF ATTAQUE ET DES PRODUCTIONS QU'A LA SUITE D'UNE COLLISION SURVENUE ENTRE SA VOITURE AUTOMOBILE ET CELLE DE BERCHARD, LACRAMPE A DEMANDE

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;JUDGMENTS;CHAMBER;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:2005:0913JUD003520703

Admin. suprême

13 septembre 2005

13 septembre 2005

Because of insufficient funding, the provision of meat, fish and dairy products was not always possible.

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;DECISIONS;DECCOMMISSION;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:1988:1215DEC001080284

Admin. suprême

15 décembre 1988

15 décembre 1988

invoked by the applicant because he had prior to the trial expressly renounced challenging these judges.

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;JUDGMENTS;CHAMBER;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:2017:0314JUD003621613

Admin. suprême

14 mars 2017

14 mars 2017

He expresses fear of the father because he does not know how the father would behave. He stated that he likes it in I. because before he was afraid and had to listen to the parents fighting.

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;JUDGMENTS;CHAMBER;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:2014:1127JUD003670109

Admin. suprême

27 novembre 2014

27 novembre 2014

    On 29 December 2004 the Government of Croatia adopted an instruction whereby it (a) instructed the State Attorney’s Office to acknowledge the plaintiffs’ claim in those proceedings because

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITY;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:2012:0710DEC006211010

Admin. suprême

10 juillet 2012

10 juillet 2012

The second assessment, made by the Goodman Team, was also unreliable because it relied heavily upon the earlier flawed Abbeyfield assessment and because the Team were geared from the outset towards the

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITY;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:2004:0406DEC006841601

Admin. suprême

6 avril 2004

6 avril 2004

The charge that McDonald's food is very unhealthy because it is high in fat, sugar, animal products and salt (sodium), and low in fibre, vitamins and minerals, and because eating it more than just occasionally

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITY;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:2003:1113DEC004323198

Admin. suprême

13 novembre 2003

13 novembre 2003

A second hearing was scheduled for 30 June 1998 because Ms M.V. and two other witnesses failed to show up.

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;JUDGMENTS;CHAMBER;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:2023:0530JUD004506617

Admin. suprême

30 mai 2023

30 mai 2023

The Finnish court obviously did not prove that, nor did it try to prove it at all, because it does not concern them – and it does not concern them because they did not even put Mesić on trial, and therefore

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;JUDGMENTS;CHAMBER;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:2022:0301JUD002312616

Admin. suprême

1 mars 2022

1 mars 2022

the offence in question to exist, and because such an analysis would have given the impression that the act, that was classified as an offence by the law, was less dangerous.

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;JUDGMENTS;CHAMBER;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:2019:1024JUD003294917

Admin. suprême

24 octobre 2019

24 octobre 2019

It may be that it is because applications are being refused. Or it may be because claimants are bridging the gap in other ways.” 20 .

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITY;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:2001:1023DEC005072099

Admin. suprême

23 octobre 2001

23 octobre 2001

He also complained that he had been denied effective access to an amparo appeal to the Constitutional Court because of the shortcomings of the legal assistance provided to him.

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITY;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:2019:1022DEC003671210

Admin. suprême

22 octobre 2019

22 octobre 2019

As to the third defendant, who was the mayor of the village, she stated that she had included him in the action because his signature was on the letter. 11.

Source officielle