CodexAI
AND
OR
NOT
"…"
DÉCISION / ECLI
TYPE
DATE
EXTRAIT
CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG
ECLI:CEDH:001-198533
24 octobre 2019
The applicant alleged under Article 6 of the Convention that the proceedings were unfair because the benches of judges which convicted her both at first and last instance level failed to hear evidence
Page 68 sur 2848
CASELAW;JUDGMENTS;CHAMBER;ENG
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2002:0409JUD004672699
9 avril 2002
Provisions on determination of the level of command of the official language 20.
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2019:0110JUD001287909
10 janvier 2019
security level.
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2009:0721JUD001260503
21 juillet 2009
They alleged that the level of noise and pollution emitted by the cooperative exceeded a tolerable level. 7.
CASELAW;JUDGMENTS;COMMITTEE;ENG
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2023:0112JUD001998919
12 janvier 2023
The Court observes that the applicants’ victim status depends on whether the redress afforded to them at the domestic level was adequate and sufficient having regard to Article 41 of the
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2017:0518JUD001077106
18 mai 2017
of jurisdiction 5 years and 17 days 2 levels of jurisdiction 1,900 2738/07 30/12/2006 Georgiy Nikolayevich Yezerskiy 26/01/1953 25/02/1998 30/06/2006 8
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2018:1115JUD002257913
15 novembre 2018
19/06/1946 Radojánné NÉCZIN 29/07/1935 Sándorné PÁNCZÉL 17/05/1966 Lászlóné SIMON 14/01/1943 Kiss Dániel Bálint Budapest 11/11/2009 14/10/2013 3 year(s) and 11 month(s) and 4 day(s) 1 level
CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITY;ENG
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2009:0331DEC000357706
31 mars 2009
On 13 October, 21 October, 28 October, 26 November, 1 December and 5 December 2008 each of the applicants informed the Court, in writing, that the cases had been settled at the domestic level and that
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2009:0331DEC000303906
On 15 October, 7 November, 14 November and 12 December 2008 and 8 and 12 January 2009 each of the applicants informed the Court, in writing, that the cases had been settled at the domestic level
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2021:0930JUD000592820
30 septembre 2021
Having examined all the material submitted to it, the Court has not found any fact or argument capable of justifying the overall length of the proceedings at the national level.
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2021:1216JUD004406515
16 décembre 2021
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2021:1014JUD003550320
14 octobre 2021
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2024:1024JUD002486321
24 octobre 2024
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2024:0905JUD005292121
5 septembre 2024
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2026:0402JUD001450025
2 avril 2026
ECLI:CEDH:001-192854
3 avril 2019
The circumstances established during the examination of the case and the evidence presented before the court demonstrate that the level of air pollution in Lipetsk is high.
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2009:0217DEC002403006
17 février 2009
1 October 2008 1,080 € 280 € 1,360 € 3. 25084/06 Sonja NOVAKOVIČ 30 May 2006 28 August 2000 19 April 2006 five years and eight months at two levels of jurisdiction 6 October 2008 1,440 €
CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITYCOM;ENG
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2015:0120DEC002792107
20 janvier 2015
On 10 April 2006 the applicant lodged an application with the Timişoara Court of First Instance seeking recognition of its right of representation at company level. 5.
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2009:0407DEC001553906
7 avril 2009
On 1 October, 7 October, 13 October, 11 November and 9 December 2008 each of the applicants informed the Court, in writing, that the cases had been settled at the domestic level and that
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2008:0513DEC000402203
13 mai 2008
2008 1,620€ 417.75€ 2,037.75€ 2 980/04 KUNŠEK Anton 6 years and 2 months for 3 levels of jurisdiction 18 February 2008 450€ 292.77€ 742.77€ 3 1247/04 JAŠAREVIČ Sladjana 5 years for 1 level of jurisdiction