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
RechercheDécisionsCodesCPHAlertes

11 119 résultats pour « Behague »

TousCCCETACAACACPHTJTCOMCJUEPrud'h.Conv. coll.BOFIP IA

DÉCISION / ECLI

TYPE

DATE

EXTRAIT

CE

CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITY;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:2004:0330DEC007193301

Admin. suprême

30 mars 2004

30 mars 2004

(d)     to examine or have examined witnesses against him and to obtain the attendance and examination of witnesses on his behalf under the same conditions as witnesses against him...”

Page 90 sur 556

← PrécédentSuivant →
Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;DECISIONS;DECCOMMISSION;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:1996:0624DEC002952695

Admin. suprême

24 juin 1996

24 juin 1996

#xa0;   On 15 December 1994 the Koblenz Court of Appeal (Oberlandesgericht) sitting as court of first instance convicted the applicant of espionage (geheimdienstliche Agententätigkeit) on behalf

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITYCOM;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:2016:0607DEC004491409

Admin. suprême

7 juin 2016

7 juin 2016

    The Court notes at the outset that it has already examined cases where the complaints were lodged on the applicants’ behalf by their representatives having no authority forms at the time

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITY;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:1999:0427DEC003879697

Admin. suprême

27 avril 1999

27 avril 1999

    The Regional Court also noted that in the agreement the applicant had recognised, on her own behalf, that the defendants were owners of the plot at issue.

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;JUDGMENTS;CHAMBER;FRA;FRE

ECLI:CE:ECHR:2022:0630JUD004290717

Admin. suprême

30 juin 2022

30 juin 2022

Violation de l'article 3 - Interdiction de la torture (Article 3 - Expulsion) (Belarus);Violation de l'article 4 du Protocole n° 4 - Interdiction des expulsions collectives d'étrangers-{général} (Article

Résumé IA — à vérifier
CE

CASELAW;JUDGMENTS;CHAMBER;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:2008:0603JUD003959505

Admin. suprême

3 juin 2008

3 juin 2008

The court stated that the failure to call and hear evidence from six eyewitnesses, Belarus nationals, had been a serious shortcoming justifying a retrial.

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;DECISIONS;DECCOMMISSION;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:1996:0904DEC002154693

Admin. suprême

4 septembre 1996

4 septembre 1996

   The applicant complains on his and also on his son's behalf of a number of violations of the Convention.   2.

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;DECISIONS;DECCOMMISSION;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:1986:0314DEC001173985

Admin. suprême

14 mars 1986

14 mars 1986

  On that occasion you will recall that I appeared only on behalf of (the applicant's brother) in relation to his application for leave to appeal against conviction.

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;DECISIONS;DECCOMMISSION;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:1997:0409DEC003102496

Admin. suprême

9 avril 1997

9 avril 1997

On 25 March 1996 the Court of Protection authorised the applicant's sister on the applicant's behalf to inspect and receive copies of the papers and documents and other information on the personal file

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;JUDGMENTS;CHAMBER;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:2005:0616JUD007472701

Admin. suprême

16 juin 2005

16 juin 2005

Moreover, because of the absence of defence counsel, he had been unable duly to question witnesses who were present or to obtain the appearance of witnesses on his behalf. 4.

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;JUDGMENTS;CHAMBER;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:2004:0203JUD005023099

Admin. suprême

3 février 2004

3 février 2004

    The applicants alleged, in particular, that they were not able to defend themselves properly, that they were not allowed to obtain the attendance and examination of witnesses on their behalf

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG

ECLI:CEDH:001-113703

Admin. suprême

17 septembre 2012

17 septembre 2012

The Romanian Helsinki Committee appealed against the judgment on the applicants’ behalf.

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITY;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:1999:0907DEC003875397

Admin. suprême

7 septembre 1999

7 septembre 1999

    As to further evidence from an employment expert, no doubt to be countered by such a person called on behalf of the Defendant and which would in any event have occasioned further delay and

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITY;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:2005:1213DEC006376700

Admin. suprême

13 décembre 2005

13 décembre 2005

The Director further stated that the Prison Code (Article   50   § 6) prohibited complaints “on behalf of other prisoners”. The penalty was imposed on account of these breaches.

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;JUDGMENTS;COMMITTEE;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:2019:0122JUD001201816

Admin. suprême

22 janvier 2019

22 janvier 2019

The representatives commented in their observations on behalf of the applicant that the arguments of the Government were unsubstantiated.

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;JUDGMENTS;CHAMBER;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:2005:1108JUD001023102

Admin. suprême

8 novembre 2005

8 novembre 2005

He lodged his application with the Court on behalf of his wife (the second applicant), who died on 25 October 2001, and on behalf of his youngest daughter (the third applicant), born in 1980. I.

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITY;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:2003:0619DEC003919998

Admin. suprême

19 juin 2003

19 juin 2003

The case was brought by him on behalf of the company. He is represented before the Court by Mr   W.   Hermeliński, a lawyer practising in Warsaw, Poland.

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;DECISIONS;DECCOMMISSION;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:1995:0522DEC002227793

Admin. suprême

22 mai 1995

22 mai 1995

The applicant states that he brings the application in the name of his brother, Abdullatif ilhan, who is paralysed and has authorised the applicant to act on his behalf.

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG

ECLI:CEDH:001-225690

Admin. suprême

1 juin 2023

1 juin 2023

applicant’s conviction was based;   Art. 6 (1) - unfair criminal proceedings - various deficiencies in the administrative offence proceedings (impossibility to obtain attendance of a witness on behalf

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITY;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:2007:0705DEC000765402

Admin. suprême

5 juillet 2007

5 juillet 2007

On 6 April 2001 the Memorial Human Rights Centre wrote to the Prosecutor General’s Office on the applicant’s behalf.

Source officielle