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

11 119 résultats pour « Behague »

RechercheDécisionsCodesCPHAlertes
TousCCCETACAACACPHTJTCOMCJUEPrud'h.Conv. coll.BOFIP IA

DÉCISION / ECLI

TYPE

DATE

EXTRAIT

CE

CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITYCOM;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:2022:0203DEC002169420

Admin. suprême

3 février 2022

3 février 2022

The observations were forwarded to the applicant’s representative, who was invited to submit observations on behalf of the applicant. No reply was received to the Registry’s letter.

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;CLIN;ENG

ECLI:CEDH:002-4729

Admin. suprême

2 septembre 2003

2 septembre 2003

Before the Court, the applicant complains that the national authorities refused to intervene on his behalf in application of that Convention.

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITYCOM;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:2014:0415DEC003957311

Admin. suprême

15 avril 2014

15 avril 2014

The observations were forwarded to the applicant’s representative, who was invited to submit observations on his behalf.

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITYCOM;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:2023:0202DEC007220413

Admin. suprême

2 février 2023

2 février 2023

The observations were forwarded to the applicant’s representative, who was invited to submit observations on behalf of the applicant. No reply was received to the Registry’s letter.

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;CLIN;ENG

ECLI:CEDH:002-3729

Admin. suprême

20 septembre 2005

20 septembre 2005

In the case of the third applicant, who worked for a private company that undertook projects on behalf of National Defence, his employer asked him to resign following a request by a military authority

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;CLIN;ENG

ECLI:CEDH:002-6887

Admin. suprême

6 avril 2000

6 avril 2000

In 1947, J.P., husband of the first applicant and father of the other applicants, had such an application lodged on his behalf for two plots of land he had formerly owned; the authorities did not reply

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITYCOM;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:2012:0110DEC001844507

Admin. suprême

10 janvier 2012

10 janvier 2012

The observations were forwarded to the applicant’s representative, who was invited to submit observations on the applicant’s behalf. No reply was received to the Registry’s letter.

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITYCOM;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:2023:0309DEC003315811

Admin. suprême

9 mars 2023

9 mars 2023

Government’s written observations in Albanian and English were sent to the applicant’s representative who was invited to submit by 21 March 2013 any written observations he wished to make in reply on behalf

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITYCOM;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:2013:1119DEC002988303

Admin. suprême

19 novembre 2013

19 novembre 2013

The first applicant expressed the wish to pursue the application on behalf of her late husband. The Ukrainian Government (“the Government”) were represented by their Agent, Mr N.

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG

ECLI:CEDH:001-170101

Admin. suprême

1 décembre 2016

1 décembre 2016

On an unspecified date in 2013 the Federal Agency for Management of State Property brought an action on behalf of the Russian Federation seeking the restitution of the basement to the state.

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;CLIN;ENG

ECLI:CEDH:002-4679

Admin. suprême

28 octobre 2003

28 octobre 2003

10-1 Freedom of expression Statements made by a lawyer in the course of judicial proceedings deemed contrary to professional standards: violation Facts : The applicant is a lawyer who was acting on behalf

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITYCOM;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:2021:1209DEC001327318

Admin. suprême

9 décembre 2021

9 décembre 2021

The observations were forwarded to the applicant’s lawyer, who was invited to submit observations on the applicant’s behalf. No reply was received to the Registry’s letter.

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITYCOM;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:2016:1213DEC003481707

Admin. suprême

13 décembre 2016

13 décembre 2016

when the direct victim dies after the application was lodged with the Court, the applicant’s heirs may pursue the application provided that they have legitimate interest in maintaining the request on behalf

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG

ECLI:CEDH:001-196063

Admin. suprême

27 août 2019

27 août 2019

The applicant alleges that she was not informed about either the questioning of those witnesses or about the participation of a legal aid lawyer on her behalf in that procedure.

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITY;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:2011:0628DEC003679905

Admin. suprême

28 juin 2011

28 juin 2011

No heirs or close relatives have expressed the wish to pursue the application on his behalf.

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG

ECLI:CEDH:001-226051

Admin. suprême

28 juin 2023

28 juin 2023

In 2006 the applicant was expelled from university for being a member of an illegal organisation and having engaged in actions on its behalf on account of his participation in a demonstration, during which

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;CLIN;ENG

ECLI:CEDH:002-3584

Admin. suprême

13 décembre 2005

13 décembre 2005

0pt; text-align:center } .s7ED160F0 { text-decoration:none } .s3DC36BA9 { font-family:Arial; text-decoration:underline; color:#0069d6 } Information Note on the Court’s case-law No. 81 December 2005 Bergauer

Source officielle
CE

PRESS;GENERAL;ENG

ECLI:CEDH:003-68140-68608

Admin. suprême

7 mars 2000

7 mars 2000

unfair because he was not informed in detail of the charges brought against him and because, he claims, the judges incorrectly assessed the evidence against him and refused to hear a witness on his behalf

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITYCOM;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:2021:1209DEC001327018

Admin. suprême

9 décembre 2021

9 décembre 2021

The observations were forwarded to the applicant’s lawyer, who was invited to submit observations on the applicant’s behalf. No reply was received to the Registry’s letter.

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;CLIN;ENG

ECLI:CEDH:002-7342

Admin. suprême

6 juillet 2010

6 juillet 2010

Agent’s immunity under the European Agreement relating to Persons Participating in Proceedings of the European Court: request rejected   Facts – A witness who had submitted affidavit evidence on behalf

Source officielle

Page 79 sur 556

← PrécédentSuivant →