Juridiction
Tri
DeÀ
Avocat
Opérateurs : AND · OR · NOT · "…"CodexAI
AND · OR · NOT · "…"DÉCISION / ECLI
TYPE
DATE
EXTRAIT
CASELAW;CLIN;ENG
ECLI:CEDH:002-15
24 janvier 2012
24 janvier 2012
Given the State’s wide margin of appreciation in regulating the pension system and the legitimate aim pursued – namely, the principle of solidarity – the applicants had not been made to bear an excessive
Source officielleCASELAW;JUDGMENTS;CHAMBER;ENG
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2005:0913JUD003653602
13 septembre 2005
13 septembre 2005
The first column referred to in section 1(4) of the Act includes the former wife of a man's son and the second column includes the father of a woman's former husband. 15.
Source officielleChambre civile TGI
6871f155df9b8685d8d06970
11 juillet 2025
11 juillet 2025
Représentant : Me Laurent BENOITON, avocat au barreau de SAINT-DENIS-DE-LA-REUNION APPELANT Monsieur [R], [C], [U] [E] [Adresse 3] [Localité 5] Représentant : Me Florence CHANE-TUNE de la SELARL WIZE
Source officielleCASELAW;DECISIONS;DECCOMMISSION;ENG
ECLI:CE:ECHR:1992:1202DEC002020292
2 décembre 1992
2 décembre 1992
His wife joined him there.
Source officielleCASELAW;DECISIONS;DECCOMMISSION;ENG
ECLI:CE:ECHR:1997:0409DEC002885395
9 avril 1997
9 avril 1997
On 16 August 1984 the applicant's first son, P.N., the applicant's wife, second son and daughter filed a new joint application for entry clearance.
Source officielleCASELAW;DECISIONS;DECCOMMISSION;ENG
ECLI:CE:ECHR:1998:0702DEC003633697
2 juillet 1998
2 juillet 1998
In response to their enquiries the applicant advised that the couple had first met while his future wife, a citizen of the United Kingdom, had visited him in prison on 24 December 1993.
Source officielleCASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITY;ENG
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2002:0312DEC006629301
12 mars 2002
12 mars 2002
It also allows any man whose wife dies on or after that date to apply for Bereavement Payment or Bereavement Allowance in exactly the same way as a woman whose husband dies on or after that date.
Source officielleCASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITY;ENG
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2011:0510DEC003581906
10 mai 2011
10 mai 2011
In addition, when he was finally allowed to see his wife, those visits were always supervised. 3.
Source officielleCASELAW;DECISIONS;DECCOMMISSION;ENG
ECLI:CE:ECHR:1996:0116DEC002764695
16 janvier 1996
16 janvier 1996
His wife did not follow him.
Source officielleCASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITYCOM;ENG
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2022:0222DEC003857217
22 février 2022
22 février 2022
In this connection, the Court notes that there is nothing in the case file to indicate that the death of the applicant’s wife was caused intentionally.
Source officielleCASELAW;DECISIONS;DECCOMMISSION;ENG
ECLI:CE:ECHR:1994:1130DEC002096592
30 novembre 1994
30 novembre 1994
When lodging his application he was resident with his family, namely his wife, also a Turkish second-generation immigrant, and their small child, at Hohenems, Austria.
Source officielleCASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITY;ENG
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2002:0430DEC001282802
30 avril 2002
30 avril 2002
The applicant and his wife were married in 1980. The applicant’s wife died on 28 January 1997. On 5 June 2000 the applicant applied to the Benefits Agency for the payment of social security benefits.
Source officielleCASELAW;DECISIONS;DECCOMMISSION;ENG
ECLI:CE:ECHR:1998:0520DEC002453094
20 mai 1998
20 mai 1998
The applicant's wife attended the hearing but was not allowed to address the Court.
Source officielleCASELAW;JUDGMENTS;CHAMBER;ENG
ECLI:CE:ECHR:1999:0927JUD003398596
27 septembre 1999
27 septembre 1999
On 19 May 1994 the head of the BDILS(NA) advised two service police investigators, who had by then arrived in Washington, that his own wife, their nanny, the applicant’s wife and another
Source officielleCASELAW;JUDGMENTS;CHAMBER;ENG
ECLI:CE:ECHR:1987:0708JUD000974982
8 juillet 1987
8 juillet 1987
He and his wife have three children; the present case concerns only the youngest of them, S, who was born on 31 October 1978.
Source officielleCASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG
ECLI:CEDH:001-182289
23 mars 2018
23 mars 2018
the cassation appeal lodged by the applicant and his wife.
Source officielleCASELAW;DECISIONS;DECCOMMISSION;ENG
ECLI:CE:ECHR:1997:1203DEC003439297
3 décembre 1997
3 décembre 1997
The Court considered that the applicant's submissions, namely contacts between his divorced wife and Judge B.'s wife or Judge B.'
Source officielleCASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITY;ENG
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2002:0905DEC005049099
5 septembre 2002
5 septembre 2002
In 1984 his wife, who was pregnant, decided to have an abortion despite his opposition. Her pregnancy was terminated on 10 October 1984.
Source officielleCASELAW;JUDGMENTS;COMMITTEE;ENG
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2026:0317JUD005020520
17 mars 2026
17 mars 2026
On 12 March 2019 the applicant had a telephone conversation with his wife, who was detained at the İzmir Closed Penal Institution for Women at the material time.
Source officielleCASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITY;ENG
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2009:1103DEC002369303
3 novembre 2009
3 novembre 2009
On 31 January 2002 the applicant’s wife hired a defence counsel who was admitted to the case on 1 February 2002. 18.
Source officiellePage 58 sur 606