Juridiction
Tri
DeÀ
Avocat
Opérateurs : AND · OR · NOT · "…"CodexAI
AND · OR · NOT · "…"DÉCISION / ECLI
TYPE
DATE
EXTRAIT
CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG
ECLI:CEDH:001-198533
24 octobre 2019
24 octobre 2019
The applicant alleged under Article 6 of the Convention that the proceedings were unfair because the benches of judges which convicted her both at first and last instance level failed to hear evidence
Source officielleCASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG
ECLI:CEDH:001-199589
25 novembre 2019
25 novembre 2019
The applicant alleged that by convicting her of the offence of revealing non-public information the domestic courts breached Article 7 of the Convention because the offence in question was not clearly
Source officielleCASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG
ECLI:CEDH:001-180973
23 janvier 2018
23 janvier 2018
the applicant’s application for restoring the proceedings to status quo ante ( restitutio in integrum ob terminem elapsum ) asking the court that her appeal against the enforcement order be examined because
Source officielleCASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG
ECLI:CEDH:001-207424
16 décembre 2020
16 décembre 2020
The applicant complains that the Court of Appeal had not been a “tribunal established by law” within the meaning of Article 6 § 1 of the Convention because one of the judges on the bench which ruled
Source officielleCASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG
ECLI:CEDH:001-192538
19 mars 2019
19 mars 2019
The applicant alleges that the proceedings were unfair under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention because the domestic courts failed to give answer to such an important objection.
Source officielleCASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG
ECLI:CEDH:001-174332
17 mai 2017
17 mai 2017
organisation for administrative offences arising from violations of the electoral legislation by its mass media outlet in October and November 2011 (i) on account of unlawful “electoral campaigning” because
Source officielleCASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG
ECLI:CEDH:001-216095
10 février 2022
10 février 2022
The applicant complains that the proceedings were not fair because the Supreme Court of Justice convicted him without hearing anew the statements relied upon for the purposes of the conviction.
Source officielleCASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG
ECLI:CEDH:001-205006
8 septembre 2020
8 septembre 2020
The applicant complains that the dismissal of the appeal as having been lodged out-of-time was formalistic because the time-limit should have been calculated from the day the decision appealed against
Source officielleCASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG
ECLI:CEDH:001-208370
5 février 2021
5 février 2021
lodged on 8 November 2019 SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE In the framework of a redundancy programme of his employer, the applicant was dismissed from a company where he had been employed for over 20 years because
Source officielle1re Section - 1re Chambre
DTA_1622667_20250506
6 mai 2025
6 mai 2025
procédure suivante : Par une requête, enregistrée le 30 décembre 2016, la société par actions simplifiée (SAS) Somfy, représentée, dans le dernier état de ses écritures, par Me Chasseloup et Me de Béchade
Source officielleCASELAW;JUDGMENTS;CHAMBER;ENG
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2008:0110JUD005417200
10 janvier 2008
10 janvier 2008
In addition, he noted that he was finding the detention difficult because of his disability.
Source officielleCASELAW;JUDGMENTS;CHAMBER;ENG
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2003:0304JUD006348600
4 mars 2003
4 mars 2003
Immediately upon his conviction, the applicant was dispensed from serving the sentence partly because of the expiry of a statutory limitation period and partly because of a 1997 amnesty law
Source officielleCASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITY;ENG
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2013:0115DEC003866308
15 janvier 2013
15 janvier 2013
It was because of these irregularities, for which Commissioner A bore no responsibility, that the earlier decision was quashed.
Source officielleCASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITY;ENG
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2005:0630DEC007136201
30 juin 2005
30 juin 2005
According to the search record, the applicant had no complaints about the way the search was carried out, yet he objected to the seizure of the central unit because it contained two hard-disks and was
Source officielleCASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITY;ENG
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2004:0325DEC002407702
25 mars 2004
25 mars 2004
The court established that the applicable requirements had been complied with because the surface and the book value of the new flat were greater that those of the old one.
Source officielleCASELAW;DECISIONS;DECCOMMISSION;ENG
ECLI:CE:ECHR:1986:0313DEC001021582
13 mars 1986
13 mars 1986
The applicant then filed a constitutional appeal in which he invoked in particular Art. 8 (Art. 8) of the Convention, alleging that the Immigration Control Act violated this provision because it
Source officielleCASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITY;ENG
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2010:0907DEC002420007
7 septembre 2010
7 septembre 2010
The applicant had not wished to do so because he planned to go into hiding after his release from prison.
Source officielleCASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITY;ENG
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2005:1108DEC001271004
8 novembre 2005
8 novembre 2005
Because the appearance as well as the actuality of justice being done is important, no judge ought, in any circumstances, to fall asleep during any stage of a criminal trial.
Source officielleCASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITY;ENG
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2013:0514DEC000457006
14 mai 2013
14 mai 2013
It reasoned that the conditions under section 35 (1) of the Privatisation Act had not been met, because the BSDC was not a State enterprise and real property included in its assets could not be sold or
Source officielleCASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITY;ENG
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2004:0511DEC004949199
11 mai 2004
11 mai 2004
by the Belarussian authorities had been received and because the applicant was not a Russian citizen.
Source officiellePage 83 sur 1499