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

4 744 résultats pour « Sher MESSINGER »

TousCCCETACAACACPHTJTCOMCJUEPrud'h.Conv. coll.BOFIP IA

DÉCISION / ECLI

TYPE

DATE

EXTRAIT

CE

CASELAW;CLIN;ENG

ECLI:CEDH:002-5496

Admin. suprême

4 septembre 2001

4 septembre 2001

Article 6 inapplicable In December 1995 the Catania Court of First Instance made an order for the confiscation of various property belonging to the applicants, including land, buildings, vehicles, and shares

Source officielle

Page 51 sur 238

← PrécédentSuivant →
CE

CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG

ECLI:CEDH:001-145849

Admin. suprême

30 juin 2014

30 juin 2014

The parents however continued to share custody. On 18 June 2003 I.M. applied for sole custody over B.M.

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;CLIN;ENG

ECLI:CEDH:002-11736

Admin. suprême

31 octobre 2017

31 octobre 2017

In order to determine whether the “right” claimed by the applicant was “civil” within the autonomous meaning of Article   6 §   1 the Court applied the Vilho Eskelinen test.

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG

ECLI:CEDH:001-158621

Admin. suprême

14 octobre 2015

14 octobre 2015

Someone who does not share these views is the president of the IM, A.S., who has assured O Independente that “the project does not face any risk” and denigrated Carlos Câmara, whom he does not recognise

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;JUDGMENTS;CHAMBER;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:2010:1221JUD004453705

Admin. suprême

21 décembre 2010

21 décembre 2010

The Government accordingly requested revision of the judgment within the meaning of Rule 80 of the Rules of Court. 4.

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITY;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:1999:0608DEC003817997

Admin. suprême

8 juin 1999

8 juin 1999

She is a doctor and resides in Larnaca. The third applicant is a British citizen born in 1947. She is retired and resides in Larnaca. The fourth applicant is a British citizen born in 1944.

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITY;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:2006:0328DEC003839403

Admin. suprême

28 mars 2006

28 mars 2006

On 31 May 2002 the District Court confirmed the inheritance and the distribution of the applicants’ shares.

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITY;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:2001:0123DEC002501997

Admin. suprême

23 janvier 2001

23 janvier 2001

Following the unlawful felling of the forest, the applicant had used the land as a sheep-run. On 4 July 1991 Vorarlberg Regional Government ( Landeshauptmann ) dismissed the applicant's appeal.

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG

ECLI:CEDH:001-171718

Admin. suprême

3 février 2017

3 février 2017

The open area outside (локальный участок) was fenced off with three-metre-high metal sheets and was so small that one hundred detainees could barely move about.

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITYCOM;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:2025:0204DEC002148721

Admin. suprême

4 février 2025

4 février 2025

They sought the annulment of an agreement according to which their shares had been transferred to the State in 2010.

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITY;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:2008:0703DEC004205804

Admin. suprême

3 juillet 2008

3 juillet 2008

It had been justified because the investigation had needed more time to finalise the charge sheet.

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;CLIN;ENG

ECLI:CEDH:002-12183

Admin. suprême

8 novembre 2018

8 novembre 2018

They all applied to the social-security contributions collection agency (“the URSSAF”) for reimbursement of the employer’s share of the contributions paid in respect of their employees, arguing that they

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITYCOM;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:2018:0703DEC000140913

Admin. suprême

3 juillet 2018

3 juillet 2018

shareholders (hereinafter “plaintiffs”) of the joint-stock company “Mašinopromet rezervni djelovi” from Podgorica brought proceedings before the Podgorica First Instance Court, seeking the annulment of a shares-related

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;JUDGMENTS;COMMITTEE;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:2015:0317JUD006524511

Admin. suprême

17 mars 2015

17 mars 2015

    On 17 August 2009 the applicant was appointed as deputy general manager of a State-owned company limited by shares. 7.

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITYCOM;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:2012:0131DEC002443110

Admin. suprême

31 janvier 2012

31 janvier 2012

On 23 March 1994 the applicant instituted civil proceedings against his former wife E.B. in the Ljubljana Basic Court requesting the court to identify the items of common property and determine the share

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;CLIN;ENG

ECLI:CEDH:002-3909

Admin. suprême

26 juin 2012

26 juin 2012

The German hunting legislation could be said to constitute a means of controlling the use of property in accordance with the general interest within the meaning of Article   1 of Protocol No.

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG

ECLI:CEDH:001-116061

Admin. suprême

18 décembre 2012

18 décembre 2012

She is represented before the Court by Mr   R.   Cibulka, a lawyer practising in Trnava. A.

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITYCOM;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:2021:0216DEC006279517

Admin. suprême

16 février 2021

16 février 2021

She was represented before the Court by the applicant in the first case. 3.     The Slovenian Government (“the Government”) were represented by their Agents, Mrs J. Morela and Mrs B.

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;JUDGMENTS;CHAMBER;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:2018:0529JUD006440609

Admin. suprême

29 mai 2018

29 mai 2018

    The Court notes that this complaint is not manifestly ill-founded within the meaning of Article 35 § 3 (a) of the Convention.

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;JUDGMENTS;CHAMBER;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:2006:0608JUD005849700

Admin. suprême

8 juin 2006

8 juin 2006

The party getting two coins was to pay the other party an amount of money equalling the difference in value between the shares.

Source officielle