CodexAI
AND
OR
NOT
"…"
DÉCISION / ECLI
TYPE
DATE
EXTRAIT
CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITY;ENG
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2012:1120DEC005849708
20 novembre 2012
They also cited examples in which the domestic courts had examined identical complaints and applied the same provision in order to terminate criminal proceedings.
Page 6 sur 8
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2008:0103DEC003479803
3 janvier 2008
The customs department maintained that they had reasonable grounds to suspect that there were documents, in electronic or other form, on the applicants’ premises which, on the basis of reasonable suspicion
CASELAW;JUDGMENTS;CHAMBER;ENG
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2024:0201JUD002243120
1 février 2024
They further claimed that the relevant prosecutors must have kept him informed about the appeal on points of law that they had lodged in the applicant’s case. 22 .
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2016:0428JUD004290612
28 avril 2016
There was no evidence suggesting that they had refused. As the applicants had not been involved in the criminal proceedings, there had been no obligation to inform them of their rights. 37.
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2008:0925DEC002815903
25 septembre 2008
there was no evidence that the intruders had belonged to federal forces.
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2011:0210JUD003872605
10 février 2011
There existed no grounds for revoking or varying the chosen measure.
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2009:1217JUD003812407
17 décembre 2009
They must therefore be declared admissible. 2. Merits (a) Article 5 § 4 of the Convention 55.
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2010:0422JUD005075707
22 avril 2010
There has accordingly been a violation of Article 6 § 1 of the Convention. 42.
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2010:0211JUD001727607
11 février 2010
There has accordingly been a violation of Article 6 § 1 of the Convention. 38.
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2010:0923DEC004637009
23 septembre 2010
that they must be rejected pursuant to Article 35 § 4.
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2008:0117JUD000443904
17 janvier 2008
The existence of such remedies must be sufficiently certain not only in theory but also in practice, failing which they will lack the requisite accessibility and effectiveness; it falls to the respondent
CASELAW;JUDGMENTS;GRANDCHAMBER;ENG
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2001:0712JUD004475998
12 juillet 2001
However, exceptions must be accepted when they are justified by special circumstances.
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2010:0422JUD003879807
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2009:0528JUD001373703
28 mai 2009
They also covered Muslim Nenkayev’s mouth with adhesive tape. They further asked the third applicant whether he had any firearms.
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2011:0113JUD001635406
13 janvier 2011
If they had carefully read those writings and the movement’s doctrine they would in fact have seen that the Raelian Movement had always strongly condemned the remarks made by one of its former members
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2009:1015JUD001705606
15 octobre 2009
Since they had not contested this matter before the domestic courts or the Chamber, they should be estopped from doing so now. 40.
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2008:0612JUD001607407
12 juin 2008
Further, there was no provision for supplying detainees with food and drinking water, and access to a toilet was problematic.
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2008:0703JUD000718803
3 juillet 2008
However, many acts that would constitute degrading or inhuman treatment in respect of prisoners may not reach the threshold of ill-treatment when they occur in the armed forces, provided that they contribute
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2009:0402JUD000670403
2 avril 2009
They further pointed out that the investigation into the incident had been pending and that there was no evidence that the armed men had been State agents.
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2010:1216JUD001152807
16 décembre 2010
The second and third applicants were born in 2001 and 2003, respectively. They live in the village of Prigorodnoe, the Groznenskiy District, in the Chechen Republic. 6.