Sur le premier moyen : Vu l'article L. 132-1 du Code du travail ; Attendu que Mlle X... a été licenciée le 11 août 1980 par la société Delperie frères qui exerce à la fois le commerce de la viande

The stays of the enforcement had not justified the delay, because the supervisory review had been aimed at an unlawful quashing of the judgment. 13.

The Court notes that the respective payments for the relevant parcels were all made with a maximum delay of six months. In the light of the case of Ak v.

The applicant holds the Government responsible for the delays caused by the cancellation due to the elections.

The Court reiterates that only delays attributable to the State may justify a finding of failure to comply with the “reasonable time” requirement (see Humen v. Poland [GC], no.

    The cases of Mr Semenov and Ms Bachurina and their grievances concerning delays in the review of the appeals against the detention orders are very similar.

The Court has thus consistently held that a delay of less than one year in payment of a monetary judicial award was in principle compatible with the Convention, while any longer delay was prima facie unreasonable

Noting the absence of any concrete disadvantages to the defence allegedly suffered by the refusal to delay the trial, it considered that the Audiencia Nacional had rightly struck a balance between the

  The applicant complains that he was not paid interest for the six-month delay in the payment of the compensation he was entitled to pursuant to the decision of the Bari Court of Appeal.

He contested the opinion of the Independent Administrative Tribunal that the delay between 10.45 a.m. and 2.10 p.m. was still reasonable.

It found no delays in the period of the proceedings on the request for reopening.

As the applicant indicated, he did receive an explanation for the delay.

Whether that situation arises must depend on the facts of the case which include, first, the overall period of delay and the reasons for the delay; second, the results of previous trials; thirdly, the

para. 2 of Protocol No. 1 Control of the use of property Company’s failure to duly raise before domestic courts complaints of authorities’ failure to take good care of its seized property and undue delay

in medical examination, lacking/delayed drug therapy, lack of/delay in consultation by a specialist, failure to keep a comprehensive record concerning the applicant’s state of health and the treatment

The obligatory one-year review was carried out with a delay of 144   days.

The indictment was quashed on grounds of delay (the applicant’s application). 2.     Proceedings concerning E 12.

After having requested a delay, the applicants replied to this request on 30 August 1990 and further offered a compromise solution.

  1 year(s) and 6 month(s)   29/11/2019 -21/01/2020 Art. 5 (4) - excessive length of judicial review of detention - The obligatory 6 ‑ month detention review was carried out with a delay