that the statement alone (which referred to rumours that the applicant had previously engaged in indecent behaviour in other schools where he had worked) did not amount to an imputation of criminal guilt

In its earlier case-law in this sphere, the Court had seen no problem in finding confiscation measures proportionate even in the absence of a conviction establishing the guilt of the accused persons and

, pour la construction du nouvel hôpital de Fleyriat à Vériat, le centre hospitalier de Bourg-en-Bresse a notamment passé en 1970 une convention avec le cabinet d'architectes Ollivier, X... et Saint-Guily

there has been a violation of Article 5, paragraph 3 (art. 5-3), in respect of each applicant;   - Holds that the respondent state is to pay to each applicant the sum of three hundred (300) Dutch Guilders

The court is to establish the facts of the case, to give a legal assessment of the facts and to determine the degree of guilt (or innocence) of the deceased.

connection, it attached significant weight to the different level of proof required in the two set of proceedings, noting that if criminal proceedings had been initiated against the member of parliament his guilt

He was, however, acquitted of the charges under Article 213 as the court found that his guilt had not been proven to the standard required in criminal proceedings.

However, by a decision of the prosecutor in charge of the case of 30 March 2010, the applicant was discharged because the evidence gathered during investigation did not prove his guilt in committing the

    The applicant also complained under Article 6 § 2 that the investigator had expressed an opinion about his guilt during the pre-trial investigation. 5.

Under Article 41 (just satisfaction) of the Convention, the Court awarded the applicant 47,552.50 Netherlands guilders (NLG) for non-pecuniary damage and for legal costs and expenses.   1.

It found that the applicant’s guilt had been properly established by the evidence; as to the allegations of ill-treatment, they had been groundless.

l'ordonnance dont la teneur suit, après débats à l'audience du même jour, concernant : PARTIES EN CAUSE : Monsieur [W] [U] Chez Mme [V] [Adresse 2] [Localité 3] Représenté par Me Hélène GUILLIER

423 481 571, dont le siège social est situé [Adresse 2] [Localité 7] [Adresse 1]), prise en la personne de son représentant légal domicilié en cette qualité audit siège représentée par Maître Elisa Gueilhers

GUILLAS La République mande et ordonne au ministre de l'intérieur et des outre-mer en ce qui le concerne ou à tous commissaires de justice à ce requis en ce qui concerne les voies de droit commun contre

GUILLAS La République mande et ordonne au ministre de l'intérieur et des outre-mer en ce qui le concerne ou à tous commissaires de justice à ce requis en ce qui concerne les voies de droit commun contre

GUILLAS La République mande et ordonne au ministre de l'intérieur et des outre-mer en ce qui le concerne ou à tous commissaires de justice à ce requis en ce qui concerne les voies de droit commun contre

GUILLAS La République mande et ordonne au ministre de l’intérieur en ce qui le concerne ou à tous commissaires de justice à ce requis en ce qui concerne les voies de droit commun contre les parties

GUILLAS La République mande et ordonne au ministre de l'intérieur et des outre-mer en ce qui le concerne ou à tous commissaires de justice à ce requis en ce qui concerne les voies de droit commun contre