Juridiction
Tri
DeÀ
Avocat
Opérateurs : AND · OR · NOT · "…"CodexAI
AND · OR · NOT · "…"DÉCISION / ECLI
TYPE
DATE
EXTRAIT
PRESS;FORTHCOMINGJUDGMENTS;ENG
ECLI:CEDH:003-1719574-1802973
29 juin 2006
29 juin 2006
For eight years and two months – from his detention in Santé Prison on 15 August 1994 until his transfer to Saint-Maur Prison on 17 October 2002 – the applicant was held in solitary confinement.
Source officiellePRESS;CHAMBERJUDGMENTS;ENG
ECLI:CEDH:003-2351862-2519830
6 mai 2008
6 mai 2008
It therefore held, by five votes to two, that there had been a violation of Article 5 § 3 of the Convention.
Source officiellePRESS;GENERAL;ENG
ECLI:CEDH:003-576457-579322
25 juin 2002
25 juin 2002
It held that the applicant had learned of the proceedings from non-judicial sources so that the failure to summon her to appear did not infringe Article 24 of the Constitution (right to a fair trial).
Source officielleCASELAW;CLIN;ENG
ECLI:CEDH:002-6382
25 mai 1999
25 mai 1999
The applicant applied to the court of appeal for the previous position in the case to be restored, arguing that she should not be held responsible for S.I.’s mistake.
Source officiellePRESS;GCREFERRALS;ENG
ECLI:CEDH:003-1050907-1087720
13 juillet 2004
13 juillet 2004
In a judgment of 26 February 2004 (see press release 094), the European Court of Human Rights held that there had been two violations of Article 2 (right to life) of the Convention concerning the shooting
Source officiellePRESS;FORTHCOMINGHEARINGS;ENG
ECLI:CEDH:003-1991601-2118310
15 mai 2007
15 mai 2007
The applicant, together with three other Kurdish Iraqi detainees who had been held at Oakington, applied for permission for judicial review of their detention claiming that it was unlawful under
Source officiellePRESS;HEARINGS;ENG
ECLI:CEDH:003-68173-68641
14 mars 2001
14 mars 2001
The Chamber further held (unanimously) that there had been no violation of Article 13.
Source officiellePRESS;CHAMBERJUDGMENTS;ENG
ECLI:CEDH:003-421712-422043
27 septembre 2001
27 septembre 2001
Turkey (application no. 31850/96) Violation Article 5 § 3 The applicants, all ten of whom are Turkish nationals, complained about the length of time (between five and 11 days) they were held in
Source officiellePRESS;GENERAL;ENG
ECLI:CEDH:003-1236254-1302862
27 janvier 2005
27 janvier 2005
It had held that the question of Article 41 (just satisfaction) was not ready for decision.
Source officiellePRESS;CHAMBERJUDGMENTS;ENG
ECLI:CEDH:003-68354-68822
22 février 2001
22 février 2001
The Court therefore held, unanimously, that there had been a violation of Article 5 § 3 (right to stand trial within a reasonable time or to release pending trial).
Source officielle6 SS
CETAT:CETATEXT000007705111
29 avril 1987
29 avril 1987
Vu la requête sommaire et le mémoire complémentaire enregistrés les 8 juillet 1985 et 7 novembre 1985 au secrétariat du Contentieux du Conseil d'Etat, présentés pour la SOCIETE HELI-PYRENEES, dont le siège
Source officiellePRESS;CHAMBERJUDGMENTS;ENG
ECLI:CEDH:003-1971803-2081961
10 avril 2007
10 avril 2007
The Court held unanimously that there had been a violation of Article 6 § 1 and awarded the applicant EUR 1,800 for non-pecuniary damage and EUR 1,000 EUR for costs and expenses.
Source officielleCASELAW;RESOLUTIONS;EXECUTION;ENG
ECLI:CEDH:001-55805
3 décembre 1999
3 décembre 1999
brought before the Court by the Commission and the Government of the United Kingdom on 28 May 1996 and 27 August 1996 respectively; Whereas in its judgment of 25 June 1997 the Court: - held
Source officiellePRESS;GENERAL;ENG
ECLI:CEDH:003-1659421-1739208
27 avril 2006
27 avril 2006
The Court therefore held unanimously that there had been a violation of Article 6 § 1 in respect of both sets of proceedings.
Source officiellePRESS;CHAMBERJUDGMENTS;ENG
ECLI:CEDH:003-68374-68842
5 juillet 2001
5 juillet 2001
The Court held, unanimously, that there had been a violation of Article 5 § 3.
Source officiellePRESS;GENERAL;ENG
ECLI:CEDH:003-477655-478824
17 janvier 2002
17 janvier 2002
The Court held unanimously that there had been a violation of Article 6 § 1 and awarded the applicant EUR 9,447.66 for non-pecuniary damage and EUR 2,446.73 for costs and expenses.
Source officiellePRESS;HEARINGS;ENG
ECLI:CEDH:003-1718210-1801533
27 juin 2006
27 juin 2006
After initially being held in Nanterre Prison, the applicant was subsequently held in Fresnes Prison, Cergy-Pontoise Prison, Meaux-Chauconin Prison and La Santé Prison in Paris.
Source officiellePRESS;ADMISSIBILITYDECISIONS;ENG
ECLI:CEDH:003-1952238-2051440
12 mars 2007
12 mars 2007
In the context of the G8 summit held in Genoa, from 19 to 21 July 2001, numerous anti- globalisation demonstrations were held in the city and substantial security arrangements were put in place
Source officiellePRESS;CHAMBERJUDGMENTS;ENG
ECLI:CEDH:003-2155045-2304148
30 octobre 2007
30 octobre 2007
Given that finding, the Court further held that it was not necessary to examine separately the complaint under Article 6 § 1.
Source officiellePRESS;CHAMBERJUDGMENTS;ENG
ECLI:CEDH:003-68274-68742
8 février 2000
8 février 2000
On 28 August 1992 the District Court held a hearing. Subsequently two other hearings were adjourned due to the applicant’s illness.
Source officiellePage 18 sur 2440