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

94 989 résultats pour « Bernie »

RechercheDécisionsCodesCPHAlertes
TousCCCETACAACACPHTJTCOMCJUEPrud'h.Conv. coll.BOFIP IA

DÉCISION / ECLI

TYPE

DATE

EXTRAIT

CE

PRESS;CHAMBERJUDGMENTS;ENG

ECLI:CEDH:003-2064491-2185464

Admin. suprême

12 juillet 2007

12 juillet 2007

  The Court then had to consider whether that interference had been “necessary in a democratic society”.

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITY;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:2002:0516DEC006422901

Admin. suprême

16 mai 2002

16 mai 2002

On 30 January 1997 the applicant lodged an internal appeal on the ground that his pension entitlement had been incorrectly calculated.

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITY;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:2004:1202DEC005595500

Admin. suprême

2 décembre 2004

2 décembre 2004

He argued that he had been sentenced under a different article of the Criminal Code than the one which had been invoked by the public prosecutor.

Source officielle
CA

Cour d'Appel

6253ca4abd3db21cbdd8a924

Appel

27 novembre 2007

27 novembre 2007

Les visites de cette maison ont été organisées par l'AGENCE BERNEX IMMOBILIER, qui fait partie du réseau ORPI, comme l'AGENCE NIVE IMMOBILIER.

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITY;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:2010:0921DEC006633809

Admin. suprême

21 septembre 2010

21 septembre 2010

given in the absence of a lawyer, had been retracted immediately after the applicant was granted access to the lawyer of his choice, and had not been supported by other materials.

Source officielle
CE

PRESS;CHAMBERJUDGMENTS;ENG

ECLI:CEDH:003-1371427-1431800

Admin. suprême

16 juin 2005

16 juin 2005

Consequently, there had been a violation of Article   8.

Source officielle
CE

PRESS;GENERAL;ENG

ECLI:CEDH:003-1255818-1308076

Admin. suprême

3 février 2005

3 février 2005

  Mr Biyan stated that while in police custody, his clothes had been removed and he been subjected to various forms of ill-treatment including electric shocks, baton and cable blows and dousing with

Source officielle
CE

PRESS;GENERAL;ENG

ECLI:CEDH:003-1777963-1880242

Admin. suprême

21 septembre 2006

21 septembre 2006

Switzerland had been portrayed as a courageous country, which, despite its neutrality, had been on the side of democracy and therefore of the Allies.

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;JUDGMENTS;CHAMBER;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:2014:0313JUD000137704

Admin. suprême

13 mars 2014

13 mars 2014

The applicant had been questioned and had confessed before the arrest record had been read out to him. He had not therefore been entitled to legal assistance during that questioning. II.

Source officielle
CE

PRESS;CHAMBERJUDGMENTS;ENG

ECLI:CEDH:003-2120904-2251081

Admin. suprême

20 septembre 2007

20 septembre 2007

The applicant’s house had been the target of a grenade attack the same year, during which he had been wounded.   Mr Sultani lodged an application for asylum on 25 March 2003.

Source officielle
CE

PRESS;GCJUDGMENTS;ENG

ECLI:CEDH:003-2220526-2371231

Admin. suprême

20 décembre 2007

20 décembre 2007

In addition, it had not been shown that Mr El Majjaoui would earn the statutory minimum wage.

Source officielle
CE

PRESS;GENERAL;ENG

ECLI:CEDH:003-1736071-1820318

Admin. suprême

13 juillet 2006

13 juillet 2006

been impossible for the applicant to obtain a DNA analysis of the mortal remains of his putative biological father; unanimously that no separate issue arose regarding the question whether there had been

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;JUDGMENTS;CHAMBER;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:2006:0406JUD007779601

Admin. suprême

6 avril 2006

6 avril 2006

    Holds that there has been a violation of Article 6 § 1 of the Convention;   3.     Holds that there has been a violation of Article 13 of the Convention;   4.

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;JUDGMENTS;CHAMBER;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:2006:0427JUD003356102

Admin. suprême

27 avril 2006

27 avril 2006

There has accordingly been a breach of Article 6 § 1. 2.     Article 13 20.

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;JUDGMENTS;CHAMBER;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:2014:0925JUD005702800

Admin. suprême

25 septembre 2014

25 septembre 2014

Thereby, an excessive individual burden had been placed on the applicant. 13.

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;JUDGMENTS;CHAMBER;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:2006:0330JUD007574201

Admin. suprême

30 mars 2006

30 mars 2006

    Holds that there has been a violation of Article 6 § 1 of the Convention;   3.     Holds that there has been a violation of Article 13 of the Convention;   4.

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;JUDGMENTS;CHAMBER;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:2006:0406JUD000788302

Admin. suprême

6 avril 2006

6 avril 2006

    Holds that there has been a violation of Article 6 § 1 of the Convention;   3.     Holds that there has been a violation of Article 13 of the Convention;   4.

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;JUDGMENTS;CHAMBER;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:2006:0413JUD001029602

Admin. suprême

13 avril 2006

13 avril 2006

    Holds that there has been a violation of Article 6 § 1 of the Convention;   3.     Holds that there has been a violation of Article 13 of the Convention;   4.

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;JUDGMENTS;CHAMBER;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:2006:0330JUD007781901

Admin. suprême

30 mars 2006

30 mars 2006

    Holds that there has been a violation of Article 6 § 1 of the Convention;   3.     Holds that there has been a violation of Article 13 of the Convention;   4.

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;JUDGMENTS;CHAMBER;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:2015:0716JUD000784806

Admin. suprême

16 juillet 2015

16 juillet 2015

According to the Government, the applicant’s request never reached the Supreme Court and has therefore not been examined. 12.

Source officielle

Page 69 sur 4750

← PrécédentSuivant →