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 · "…"
RechercheDécisionsCodesCPHAlertes
Exporter CSV

1 472 résultats pour « Samak »

TousCCCETACAACACPHTJTCOMCJUEPrud'h.Conv. coll.BOFIP IA

DÉCISION / ECLI

TYPE

DATE

EXTRAIT

CE

CASELAW;JUDGMENTS;CHAMBER;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:2009:0205JUD001376904

Admin. suprême

5 février 2009

5 février 2009

Such measures form part of the diligence which the Contracting States must exercise in order to ensure that the rights guaranteed by Article 6 are enjoyed in an effective manner” (see Sadak and Others

Page 72 sur 74

← PrécédentSuivant →
Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;JUDGMENTS;CHAMBER;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:2020:0804JUD000511315

Admin. suprême

4 août 2020

4 août 2020

employed are not disproportionate or arbitrary (see Davydov and   Others , cited above, § 272; see also Paksas , cited above, §   96 ‑ 97; Tănase , cited above, §§ 161-62; and Dicle and Sadak

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;JUDGMENTS;COMMITTEE;FRA;FRE

ECLI:CE:ECHR:2018:0904JUD002081512

Admin. suprême

4 septembre 2018

4 septembre 2018

İnan AKMEŞE Article 5 § 4 de la Convention Dommage moral réclamé : 10 000 EUR (dix mille euros) Frais et dépens réclamé   : 7 434 TRY (environ 1   450 EUR)   43311/13 21 mai 2012 Hakzan SADAK

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;JUDGMENTS;CHAMBER;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:2016:0329JUD004708212

Admin. suprême

29 mars 2016

29 mars 2016

to satisfy the requirements of Article 6 § 3 (d), which requires the Contracting States to take positive steps to enable the accused to examine or have examined witnesses testifying against him (see Sadak

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;JUDGMENTS;CHAMBER;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:2008:1204JUD000111102

Admin. suprême

4 décembre 2008

4 décembre 2008

witnesses against him, such measures being part of the diligence the Contracting States must exercise in order to ensure that the rights guaranteed by Article 6 are enjoyed in an effective manner (see Sadak

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;JUDGMENTS;CHAMBER;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:2011:1025JUD004438704

Admin. suprême

25 octobre 2011

25 octobre 2011

/04/2003 115,830     116,640     21648/08 24/03/2008 Andrey Viktorovich FOMINYKH 19/09/1979 Rostov-on-Don Garrison Military Court 28/09/2004 516,400.32   42081/08 17/07/2008 Samat

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;JUDGMENTS;CHAMBER;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:2004:0701JUD003668197

Admin. suprême

1 juillet 2004

1 juillet 2004

  26772/95, § 201, ECHR 2000-IV; and Sadak and Others v. Turkey (no. 2) , nos. 25144/94, 26149/95 to 26154/95, 27100/95 and 27101/95, § 31, ECHR   2002-IV). 55.

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;JUDGMENTS;CHAMBER;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:2012:0228JUD001846906

Admin. suprême

28 février 2012

28 février 2012

Greece , 1 July 1997, §   39, Reports of Judgments and Decisions 1997-IV; and Yumak and Sadak   v. Turkey [GC], no. 10226/03, §   109 (iii), 8 July 2008). 38.

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG

ECLI:CEDH:001-222717

Admin. suprême

20 décembre 2022

20 décembre 2022

Article 3 of Protocol No. 1 to organise elections “under conditions which will ensure the free expression of the opinion of the people in the choice of the legislature” (see, for example, Yumak and Sadak

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;JUDGMENTS;CHAMBER;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:2018:0710JUD002296308

Admin. suprême

10 juillet 2018

10 juillet 2018

of its finding of a violation under Article 6 §§ 1 and 3 (d) of the Convention (see paragraph 55 above), the Court considers that there is no need to make a separate ruling on these complaints (see Sadak

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;JUDGMENTS;COMMITTEE;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:2025:0918JUD003168821

Admin. suprême

18 septembre 2025

18 septembre 2025

record had been drawn up,   Art. 6 (1) - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of a prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings. 4,000   40967/22 11/08/2022 Samat

Source officielle
CE

PRESS;CHAMBERJUDGMENTS;ENG

ECLI:CEDH:003-2027112-2150468

Admin. suprême

7 juin 2007

7 juin 2007

    No violation of Article 6 § 1 (fairness) Botmeh and Alami v. the United Kingdom (no. 15187/03)   The applicants, Jawad Botmeh and Samar Alami, are Palestinian nationals who were born

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITYCOM;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:2020:0428DEC004404719

Admin. suprême

28 avril 2020

28 avril 2020

In addition, he noted that under the Estonian law he had a right to receive maintenance ( ülalpidamist saama ) from his children.

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;RESOLUTIONS;EXECUTION;ENG

ECLI:CEDH:001-69846

Admin. suprême

7 juin 2005

7 juin 2005

  Two recent judgments of the Court of Cassation – one dealing with the re-trial of Sadak, Zana, Dicle and Doğan, and the other one concerning the surveillance of telephone conversations – highlight

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;JUDGMENTS;CHAMBER;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:2006:0615JUD003355403

Admin. suprême

15 juin 2006

15 juin 2006

Furthermore, the Court has considered that this Article guarantees the individual’s right to stand for election and, once elected, to sit as a member of parliament (see Sadak and Others v.

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;JUDGMENTS;CHAMBER;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:2018:1127JUD005356109

Admin. suprême

27 novembre 2018

27 novembre 2018

Sadak, a lawyer practising in Istanbul. The second applicant, Ahmet Urat, was represented by Mr E. Özkan, a lawyer practising in Diyarbakır.

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;JUDGMENTS;CHAMBER;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:2013:1015JUD003388205

Admin. suprême

15 octobre 2013

15 octobre 2013

xa0;   Paragraph 1 of Article 6 taken together with paragraph 3 requires the Contracting States to take positive steps to enable the accused to examine or have examined witnesses against him (see Sadak

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;JUDGMENTS;CHAMBER;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:2007:0719JUD001786404

Admin. suprême

19 juillet 2007

19 juillet 2007

such an extent as to impair their very essence and deprive them of their effectiveness; that they are imposed in pursuit of a legitimate aim; and that the means employed are not disproportionate (see Sadak

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;JUDGMENTS;CHAMBER;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:2012:0710JUD000457007

Admin. suprême

10 juillet 2012

10 juillet 2012

41461/02, § 98, 24 July 2008), and secondly, that the Contracting States are required to take positive steps, in particular to enable an accused to examine or have examined witnesses against him (see Sadak

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;JUDGMENTS;CHAMBER;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:2008:0527JUD003897803

Admin. suprême

27 mai 2008

27 mai 2008

such an extent as to impair their very essence and deprive them of their effectiveness; that they are imposed in pursuit of a legitimate aim; and that the means employed are not disproportionate (see Sadak

Source officielle