n'est ni utile ni nécessaire ; que, s'agissant de fait de contrebande, il appartient à Job X... d'apporter la preuve de sa bonne foi, or il a reconnu que depuis le chargement des palettes à Beneden-Leeuwen

COUR D'APPEL DE LYON FAITS - PROCÉDURE - PRÉTENTIONS DES PARTIES Par acte du 12 mai 1992, reçu par maître Pierre LEUFFLEN et maître Michel RAYMOND (ciaprès les notaires), la société civile immobilière

The leaflet contained the following text in bold letters: “In the day clinic Dr   M./Dr   R. [full names and address] unlawful abortions are performed”.

While acknowledging the applicants’ right to express their ideas, the Supreme Court had found that the statements made in the leaflets were unnecessarily offensive.

about the way in which the public had reacted to the leaflet.

La société Charpente et Menuiserie Leuillet [Localité 25] et Fils ainsi que la SMABTP ont élevé un incident.

On 3 April 2011 leaflets containing information about the salary of the Mayor of Dąbrowa Tarnowska and his photograph were distributed. The leaflets were anonymous.

Furthermore, the applicant deposited leaflets in all letterboxes in the vicinity of the day clinic.

Van Leeuwen contro il Comune di Rotterdam.#Domanda di pronuncia pregiudiziale: Gerechtshof 's-Gravenhage - Paesi Bassi.#Causa 32-67.

against Azerbaijan lodged on 16 March 2015 communicated on 10 March 2023 SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE The application concerns arrest and administrative conviction of the applicant for distributing leaflets

According to the official records, the applicant was arrested because he had violated public order by illegally distributing leaflets and, when requested to stop, he had been rude towards the police.

Similarly to the first leaflet, a not negligible part of the readers would have understood from the leaflet that Dr S.’s professional activities had constituted aggravated murder.

The publication of that leaflet had not breached the electoral laws.

During the operation, they seized the leaflets that had been ordered by REAL but had not yet been delivered to it.

Van Leeuwen tegen Gemeente Rotterdam. # Verzoek om een prejudiciële beslissing: Gerechtshof 's-Gravenhage - Nederland. # Zaak 32-67.

. # Návrh na začatie prejudiciálneho konania Rechtbank van Koophandel Leuven - Belgicko. # Vec C-369/89.

The applicant party was later dissolved for its extremist activity including production and dissemination of the leaflet. QUESTIONS TO THE PARTIES 1.

VU LA REQUETE SOMMAIRE ET LE MEMOIRE AMPLIATIF PRESENTES POUR LA SOCIETE LEFLON ET COMPAGNIE ET POUR LE SIEUR HOELTGEN X...