CodexAI
AND
OR
NOT
"…"
DÉCISION / ECLI
TYPE
DATE
EXTRAIT
CASELAW;JUDGMENTS;CHAMBER;ENG
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2007:0118JUD001072203
18 janvier 2007
The Government contended that the Bailiffs' Service had performed all necessary actions and could not be blamed for the delay.
Page 49 sur 123
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2007:0118JUD000507904
The Government stressed that the Bailiffs' Service had performed all necessary actions and could not be blamed for the delay. 21. The applicant disagreed. 22.
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2007:0222JUD007683501
22 février 2007
It has been the Court's constant approach that an applicant cannot be blamed for taking full advantage of the resources afforded by national law in the defence of his interests (see, mutatis mutandis,
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2007:0329JUD002298604
29 mars 2007
The length of the enforcement proceedings had been caused by the critical financial situation of the debtor companies and the Bailiffs' Service had performed all necessary actions and could not be blamed
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2001:0412JUD004135498
12 avril 2001
The applicant cannot be blamed for making use of available remedies.
CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITY;ENG
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2003:0429DEC004654999
29 avril 2003
Consequently, in such an unclear legal situation, he could not be blamed for a mistake of law either.
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2000:0106DEC003338296
6 janvier 2000
These antiques had been brought to Austria by Mrs H. in her car in black plastic bags under the bonnet of her car, the motor being covered with blankets made of asbestos.
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2005:1004JUD002047302
4 octobre 2005
The Government further maintained that the Bailiffs' Service performed all necessary actions and could not be blamed for the delay. 16. The applicant disagreed.
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2003:1118DEC006144400
18 novembre 2003
In sum, the applicant considered that he could not be blamed for the procrastination of the proceedings and that the authorities were responsible for their excessive length.
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2007:0329JUD001836803
As for the non-enforcement of the judgment of 6 February 2002 the Government maintained that the Bailiffs' Service performed all necessary actions and cannot be blamed for the delay.
CASELAW;JUDGMENTS;COMMITTEE;ENG
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2016:1110JUD006567911
10 novembre 2016
Even though he only accepted it in 2011, the Court does not consider that he should be blamed for the delay after 2007, as he was in principle not obliged to agree to a different means of compensation.
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2017:0706JUD005048714
6 juillet 2017
12/12/2006 pending More than 10 year(s) and 4 month(s) and 26 day(s) 130 inmate(s) 1.6 m² 6 toilet(s) 6 sinks, no hot water, poor food quality, not provided with warm seasonal clothes and shoes and blanket
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2012:0419JUD002443606
19 avril 2012
The Court considers that primary responsibility for the delay rested with the domestic authorities because the applicant complied with the rules of procedure and could not be blamed for not lodging her
CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITYCOM;ENG
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2013:0319DEC004597108
19 mars 2013
This could be concluded from a letter of the applicant to the court in which he blamed other persons for the offence and from an expert opinion pursuant to which the applicant had an ambivalent attidude
CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG
ECLI:CEDH:001-128180
16 octobre 2013
They maintain that the prohibition of “homosexual propaganda” introduced by the recent legislation constitutes a blanket ban on the mere mention of homosexuality and that it applies irrespective of the
ECLI:CEDH:001-195113
8 juillet 2019
On 18 March 2016 the Chief of the Rivne Police decided that O.L.’s actions on 23 February 2016 (notably, badmouthing and threatening the applicant and piercing a blanket with
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2010:1021JUD000466504
21 octobre 2010
With regard to the Government’s argument concerning the applicant’s own responsibility for the delays, the Court reiterates that an applicant cannot be blamed for taking full advantage of
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2024:0711JUD002840719
11 juillet 2024
The appellate court noted that Article 57 1 of the CAO provided for blanket confiscation of all instruments of crime. No right of appeal lay against the above decision. 5.
ECLI:CEDH:001-126314
12 août 2013
A blanket application of legal restrictions tends to be over-inclusive and will thus fail the proportionality test because no consideration has been given to the specific circumstances of the case. ...
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2000:0330DEC003944498
30 mars 2000
Before the court, the applicant gave a different account of the events and blamed the other co-accused, C., for the alleged offences.