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

927 résultats pour « Privitello »

RechercheDécisionsCodesCPHAlertes
TousCCCETACAACACPHTJTCOMCJUEPrud'h.Conv. coll.BOFIP IA

DÉCISION / ECLI

TYPE

DATE

EXTRAIT

CE

CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG

ECLI:CEDH:001-166715

Admin. suprême

22 août 2016

22 août 2016

    Prosecution of the offence specified in § 1 or 2 shall be via a privately brought charge.” Article 213 provides as follows: “§   1.

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG

ECLI:CEDH:001-163060

Admin. suprême

21 avril 2016

21 avril 2016

    Rei vindicatio proceedings In 2003 the company I., already privately-owned, brought against the applicant company a rei vindicatio action, claiming back the properties described above.

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITY;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:2010:0916DEC003790804

Admin. suprême

16 septembre 2010

16 septembre 2010

submitted by the respondent Government, Having deliberated, decides as follows: THE FACTS The applicant, ZAO Izdatelskiy Dom “Risk” ( закрытое акционерное общество «Издательский дом «Риск» ), is a privately

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG

ECLI:CEDH:001-188252

Admin. suprême

14 novembre 2018

14 novembre 2018

FOURTH SECTION Application no. 2836/10 TSENTR ‘UKRASA’ against Ukraine lodged on 30 December 2009 STATEMENT OF FACTS The applicant company, Center of Sweet Decoration “Ukrasa” (Tsentr “Ukrasa”), is a privately

Source officielle
CE

PRESS;HEARINGS;ENG

ECLI:CEDH:003-914759-940590

Admin. suprême

27 janvier 2004

27 janvier 2004

  The house was taken under state management after the entering into force, on 13 February 1946, of a decree giving the Polish authorities power to assign flats in privately-owned buildings to particular

Source officielle
CE

PRESS;CHAMBERJUDGMENTS;ENG

ECLI:CEDH:003-2880387-3172014

Admin. suprême

8 octobre 2009

8 octobre 2009

Russia (no. 42439/02) The applicants, Selikhat Shemilova and her relative Magomed Shemilov, are Russian nationals who were born in 1912 and 1966 respectively, and at the relevant time lived in a privately

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITYCOM;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:2018:1120DEC000085807

Admin. suprême

20 novembre 2018

20 novembre 2018

2014 and 9 March 2016 to encompass the examination of complaints relating to, among other things, alleged breaches of the right to peaceful enjoyment of possessions on account of the allocation of privately-owned

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG

ECLI:CEDH:001-159850

Admin. suprême

17 décembre 2015

17 décembre 2015

January 2008 and for the other acts and decisions of that authority in the present case, and did that authority have competence under the domestic law to take decisions resulting in expropriation of privately

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITYCOM;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:2016:1011DEC001718013

Admin. suprême

11 octobre 2016

11 octobre 2016

to strike the application out of the list of cases and the applicant’s reply to that declaration, Having deliberated, decides as follows: FACTS AND PROCEDURE The applicant, Intermedical D.O.O., is privately

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITYCOM;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:2016:1122DEC004563813

Admin. suprême

22 novembre 2016

22 novembre 2016

to strike the application out of the list of cases and the applicant’s reply to that declaration, Having deliberated, decides as follows: FACTS AND PROCEDURE The applicant, Gaj Rašović D.O.O., is privately

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG

ECLI:CEDH:001-186752

Admin. suprême

11 septembre 2018

11 septembre 2018

FOURTH SECTION Application no. 51010/10 TELECOMPANIYA IMPULS, TOV against Ukraine lodged on 27 August 2010 STATEMENT OF FACTS The applicant, Telecompaniya Impuls, TOV (“the applicant company”), is a privately

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;JUDGMENTS;COMMITTEE;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:2020:1119JUD006554613

Admin. suprême

19 novembre 2020

19 novembre 2020

the applicant had at least until 22   April 2013 (as 21 April 2013, which would have been the last day of the 30-day time ‑ limit, was a Sunday) to lodge a cassation appeal prepared by a privately-hired

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITY;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:2014:1113DEC002134107

Admin. suprême

13 novembre 2014

13 novembre 2014

They had concluded that the case had concerned a privately prosecutable offence and had informed the first applicant’s representative thereof.

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;JUDGMENTS;CHAMBER;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:2009:0728JUD000895804

Admin. suprême

28 juillet 2009

28 juillet 2009

    Under Article 57 of the Body of Ethical Rules adopted by the National Bar Council on 10 October 1998, when an advocate, either privately hired by the client or appointed under legal aid scheme

Source officielle
CA

8ème chambre

686f4e31334d55acd19f1d88

Appel

9 juillet 2025

9 juillet 2025

Localité 4] (bénéficiaire d'une aide juridictionnelle Totale numéro 2022/016487 du 22/09/2022 accordée par le bureau d'aide juridictionnelle de [Localité 5]) Représentée par Me Anne BARLATIER PRIVITELLO

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITYCOM;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:2012:0403DEC004046605

Admin. suprême

3 avril 2012

3 avril 2012

compatible with effective access to the highest administrative court and which ensured equal treatment for   parties represented by lawyers appointed under the legal ‑ aid scheme   and by privately

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;JUDGMENTS;COMMITTEE;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:2017:0404JUD003700613

Admin. suprême

4 avril 2017

4 avril 2017

It abolished the legal concept of the specially protected tenancy and provided that the holders of such tenancies in respect of, inter alia , privately owned flats were to become “protected lessees” (

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITYCOM;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:2018:1009DEC000762910

Admin. suprême

9 octobre 2018

9 octobre 2018

Oltenia was reorganised in accordance with Law no. 133/1996 on the Transformation of Private Ownership Funds in Financial Investment Companies and is currently an entirely privately ‑ owned company

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;JUDGMENTS;CHAMBER;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:2013:0409JUD002425011

Admin. suprême

9 avril 2013

9 avril 2013

manner compatible with effective access to the highest administrative court and which ensured equal treatment for parties represented by lawyers appointed under the legal ‑ aid scheme and by privately

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;DECISIONS;DECCOMMISSION;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:1990:1001DEC001474789

Admin. suprême

1 octobre 1990

1 octobre 1990

  The applicant may attend these services and may be visited by the chaplain privately in his cell, or by a pentecostalist minister.

Source officielle

Page 10 sur 47

← PrécédentSuivant →