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

45 102 résultats pour « Alfred »

TousCCCETACAACACPHTJTCOMCJUEPrud'h.Conv. coll.BOFIP IA

DÉCISION / ECLI

TYPE

DATE

EXTRAIT

CE

CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITYCOM;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:2025:0904DEC001243823

Admin. suprême

4 septembre 2025

4 septembre 2025

:151.44pt; display:inline-block } .s5D826FD4 { width:25.88pt; display:inline-block } .s1B61D60 { width:156.43pt; display:inline-block }     FIRST SECTION DECISION Application no. 12438/23 Alfredo

Source officielle

Page 73 sur 2256

← PrécédentSuivant →
CE

CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG

ECLI:CEDH:001-186643

Admin. suprême

6 septembre 2018

6 septembre 2018

Some of the applications, as specified in the appendix, also raise the following issues: the alleged overcrowding and poor conditions of the applicants’ detention, the alleged breach of the procedure for

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;DECISIONS;DECCOMMISSION;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:1973:0205DEC000552572

Admin. suprême

5 février 1973

5 février 1973

September 1971;   - the alleged refusal to allow him to consult his lawyer for a period of two weeks or to receive visits from his fiancée and friends and the alleged withholding of all his outgoing

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;JUDGMENTS;CHAMBER;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:1998:0525JUD002227593

Admin. suprême

25 mai 1998

25 mai 1998

The applicant appears to have gone to the Human Rights Association one month after his alleged incident and to have given a statement there.

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;JUDGMENTS;CHAMBER;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:2003:0304JUD004178498

Admin. suprême

4 mars 2003

4 mars 2003

    ALLEGED VIOLATION OF ARTICLE 6 § 1 OF THE CONVENTION 43.

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;JUDGMENTS;CHAMBER;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:2025:0306JUD000247421

Admin. suprême

6 mars 2025

6 mars 2025

Preliminary objection partially allowed (Art. 34) Individual applications;(Art. 34) Locus standi;(Art. 34) Victim;Remainder inadmissible (Art. 35) Admissibility criteria;(Art. 35-3-a) Ratione materiae;

Résumé IA — à vérifier
CE

CASELAW;CLIN;ENG

ECLI:CEDH:002-7776

Admin. suprême

25 mai 1998

25 mai 1998

Turkey - 22275/93 Judgment 25.5.1998 Article 13 Effective remedy Alleged destruction of house and possessions by security forces and village guards and lack of remedies in south-east Turkey: no violation

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;JUDGMENTS;CHAMBER;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:2006:1212JUD005433000

Admin. suprême

12 décembre 2006

12 décembre 2006

    ALLEGED VIOLATION OF ARTICLE 6 § 1 OF THE CONVENTION 66.

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG

ECLI:CEDH:001-187560

Admin. suprême

8 octobre 2018

8 octobre 2018

Applications nos. 51920/10 and 61632/10 also concern the alleged lack of adequate and proper opportunity to challenge the documentary evidence against the applicants, and the alleged failure of the trial

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITY;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:2010:0824DEC001837609

Admin. suprême

24 août 2010

24 août 2010

In his defence submissions to the trial court on 12 March 1998, the applicant alleged that he was forced to sign self-incriminating statements while in police custody.

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG

ECLI:CEDH:001-199345

Admin. suprême

22 novembre 2019

22 novembre 2019

; 8 of the Convention; and Article 13 of the Convention on account of the alleged lack of an effective remedy in respect of his complaint under Article 8.

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITY;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:2021:0907DEC005891019

Admin. suprême

7 septembre 2021

7 septembre 2021

THE LAW ALLEGED VIOLATION OF ARTICLE 1 of PROTOCOL NO.1 TO THE CONVENTION 25.

Source officielle
TA

Tribunal Administratif de Nancy

ORTA_2302500_20230825

Administratif

25 août 2023

25 août 2023

B A, représenté par Me Vaxelaire, demande au tribunal : 1°) de condamner l'ALFOREAS IRTS de Lorraine à lui payer la somme de 10 000 euros à titre de dommages et intérêts ; 2°) de mettre à la charge

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;CLIN;ENG

ECLI:CEDH:002-14464

Admin. suprême

7 janvier 2025

7 janvier 2025

She alleged that, in the afternoon, while awaiting a lawyer, N.O., she had been arrested in Nea Vyssa, then taken to a border post and held there.

Source officielle
CA

Cour d'Appel

6253cd18bd3db21cbdd923df

Appel

15 mai 2015

15 mai 2015

Madame Françoise I... ... 97500 ST PIERRE ET MIQUELON Madame Marie-Joseph J... ... ... 97500 ST PIERRE ET MIQUELON Monsieur Robert K... ... 97500 ST PIERRE ET MIQUELON Madame Alfreda

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;JUDGMENTS;CHAMBER;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:2019:0425JUD003646908

Admin. suprême

25 avril 2019

25 avril 2019

    The applicant alleged that, following the decision of the Constitutional Court, he was allowed to attend the hearing on 5 March 2008 for one hour.

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG

ECLI:CEDH:001-177114

Admin. suprême

24 août 2017

24 août 2017

The application concerns the applicant’s alleged ill ‑ treatment during her arrest, the alleged breach of her right to freedom of expression on account of her criminal convictions (under section

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG

ECLI:CEDH:001-209607

Admin. suprême

31 mars 2021

31 mars 2021

The applicant lodged a criminal complaint against the alleged offender.

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG

ECLI:CEDH:001-203433

Admin. suprême

3 juin 2020

3 juin 2020

The applicant complains that his right to be heard by an independent and impartial tribunal was violated on account of the alleged connections of two Supreme Court Justices sitting on the panel in his

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG

ECLI:CEDH:001-210397

Admin. suprême

10 mai 2021

10 mai 2021

His application before the Court mainly concerns the following issues: -     alleged inadequacy of the medical care in detention, in particular, on account of the applicant’s continued inability

Source officielle