CodexAI
AND
OR
NOT
"…"
DÉCISION / ECLI
TYPE
DATE
EXTRAIT
CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITYCOM;ENG
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2013:0604DEC006871511
4 juin 2013
text-align:justify } .s9D48DD53 { margin-top:6pt; margin-left:21.25pt; margin-bottom:6pt; text-indent:7.1pt; text-align:justify; font-size:10pt } .sB90861A5 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic; letter-spacing
CASELAW;JUDGMENTS;COMMITTEE;FRA;FRE
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2011:0628JUD004496405
28 juin 2011
:-0.1pt } .s9C91EB7E { font-family:Arial; font-size:8pt; font-style:italic; letter-spacing:-0.1pt; vertical-align:super } .s56E27C8 { margin-top:6pt; margin-left:21.25pt; margin-bottom:24pt; text-indent
CASELAW;JUDGMENTS;CHAMBER;FRA;FRE
ECLI:CE:ECHR:1998:0923JUD002821395
23 septembre 1998
; text-align:justify } .s5BD3D434 { margin-top:12pt; margin-left:20.15pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-indent:8.65pt; text-align:justify } .sF3F78251 { margin-top:12pt; margin-left:20.15pt; margin-bottom:6pt
CASELAW;JUDGMENTS;CHAMBER;ENG
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2020:1008JUD004175209
8 octobre 2020
On 15 March 2007 the applicant published an open letter to the Prosecutor General on an Internet news site. The letter reads as follows: “...
CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITY;ENG
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2008:1216DEC002437706
16 décembre 2008
:14.2pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:justify } .sDD165512 { margin-top:12pt; margin-left:14.2pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:justify } .sD66C1369 { margin-top:0pt; margin-left:17.3pt; margin-bottom
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2002:0613JUD003859497
13 juin 2002
10pt } .s61BF121A { margin-top:24pt; margin-left:31.75pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-indent:-20.15pt; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s24C63AC { margin-top:18pt; margin-left:31.75pt; margin-bottom
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2012:1218DEC001025308
18 décembre 2012
:12pt; text-indent:7.1pt; text-align:justify; font-size:10pt } .sFD4D42B6 { margin-top:12pt; margin-left:21.25pt; margin-bottom:6pt; text-indent:7.1pt; text-align:justify; font-size:10pt } .sEC2CB098 {
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2017:0606DEC005417616
6 juin 2017
After unsuccessful friendly-settlement negotiations, by letter dated 14 February 2017 the Government informed the Court that they proposed to make a declaration with a view to resolving the issues
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2011:1011DEC004923607
11 octobre 2011
Following the failure by the parties to reach a friendly settlement the Government informed the Court, by letter of 15 July 2011, that they proposed to make a declaration with a view to resolving the issue
comm
ECLI:FR:CCASS:2011:CO00193
1 mars 2011
troisième branche : Vu l'article 1382 du code civil ; Attendu que soutenant qu'elle était l'importateur et le distributeur exclusif en France et dans les territoires et départements d'Outre-mer de lecteurs
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2008:1016JUD004456204
16 octobre 2008
{ margin-top:24pt; margin-left:11.6pt; margin-bottom:24pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s25BD2B45 { margin-top:24pt; margin-left:36.6pt; margin-bottom:6pt; text-indent
CASELAW;JUDGMENTS;GRANDCHAMBER;FRA;FRE
ECLI:CE:ECHR:1999:0325JUD002544494
25 mars 1999
text-align:justify; line-height:11.5pt } .s5BD3D434 { margin-top:12pt; margin-left:20.15pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-indent:8.65pt; text-align:justify } .s5B1C7C9E { margin-top:12pt; margin-left:20.15pt
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2012:1016JUD002707904
16 octobre 2012
margin-left:17pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:-17pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .sB2D0B857 { margin-top:0pt; margin-left:17.3pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2018:1127DEC000760707
27 novembre 2018
been left unanswered. 15.
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2012:0207DEC002707108
7 février 2012
By a letter of 12 January 2011 Mr Martynovych, the applicant’s son and heir, informed the Court of the applicant’s death in December 2009 and expressed in substance his agreement with the terms of the
CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITY;FRA;FRE
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2009:1110DEC001171003
10 novembre 2009
:0.1pt } .s5DAD33EF { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic; letter-spacing:0.1pt } .s72E00F { font-family:Arial; font-size:8pt; letter-spacing:0.1pt; vertical-align:super } .s88A92475 { margin-top:12pt
CASELAW;RESOLUTIONS;EXECUTION;FRA;FRE
ECLI:CEDH:001-237541
19 septembre 2024
:solid; border-left-width:0.75pt; border-bottom-style:solid; border-bottom-width:0.75pt; padding-right:5.03pt; padding-left:5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .sF004B676 { border-left-style:solid; border-left-width
ECLI:CE:ECHR:1999:0728JUD003344096
28 juillet 1999
:Arial; font-style:italic; letter-spacing:-0.1pt } .s2487DA34 { font-family:Arial; font-size:8pt; letter-spacing:-0.1pt; vertical-align:super } .s9F0FC82B { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:30pt; text-align
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2002:0905DEC004098798
5 septembre 2002
Il soutient par ailleurs que l’ingérence en question était nécessaire dans une société démocratique, dans la mesure où l’information litigieuse publiée dans le journal ne représenterait pas une simple
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2012:0124DEC002993010
24 janvier 2012
:0pt } .sAFADD36F { margin-top:12pt; margin-left:29.21pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; padding-left:2.99pt; font-family:Arial } .sFBC99493 { font-style:italic }
Page 21 sur 1109