CodexAI
AND
OR
NOT
"…"
DÉCISION / ECLI
TYPE
DATE
EXTRAIT
soc
613723c9cd5801467740e292
18 juillet 2001
L. 121-1 du Code du travail et de l'article 1134 du Code civil ; 4 / qu'en se fondant sur l'avis de la commission paritaire nationale qui n'a émis qu'un simple avis et dont la compétence ne concerne
Page 27 sur 4049
CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG
ECLI:CEDH:001-122325
10 juin 2013
of the witness by the defence in breach of Article 6 § 3 (d) of the Convention.
ECLI:CEDH:001-113156
30 août 2012
The conviction was founded, to a decisive extent, on the pre-trial statements by the victim and eye-witness.
CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITYCOM;ENG
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2023:0228DEC005836718
28 février 2023
The applicants complained under Article 6 § 1 and Article 13 of the Convention of the unfairness of the proceedings, of the denial of a review of their criminal conviction (see paragraphs
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2022:0208DEC000547114
8 février 2022
Croatia , no. 21613/16, § 92, 31 October 2019) and must therefore be rejected pursuant to Article 35 § 4. 7.
Cour d'Appel
6253caa1bd3db21cbdd8b9b3
26 mai 2008
Elle soutient qu'il ne s'agissait en aucune façon d'un stage non rémunéré pour lequel la question de la requalification pourrait se poser.
CASELAW;JUDGMENTS;CHAMBER;ENG
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2009:1020JUD002950303
20 octobre 2009
It follows that it must be declared inadmissible as being manifestly ill-founded, pursuant to Article 35 §§ 3 and 4 of the Convention. 31.
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2023:0323DEC003267113
23 mars 2023
Relying on Article 6 §§ 1 and 3 (d) of the Convention, the applicant complained that the criminal proceedings against him had been unfair because his conviction had been based on the statements
CASELAW;DECISIONS;DECCOMMISSION;ENG
ECLI:CE:ECHR:1994:0406DEC002090192
6 avril 1994
He also invokes Article 6 para. 3 (b) (Art. 6-3-b) of the Convention.
comm
613724ddcd58014677418fd2
6 février 2007
convention d'aide aux cinématographies peu diffusées, conclue entre le CNC et la société PGD, régulièrement versée aux débats, stipulait, notamment : "article 1 : (...)
CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITY;ENG
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2012:0207DEC006694209
7 février 2012
It follows that it must be rejected in accordance with Article 35 §§ 1 and 4 of the Convention. (ii) The applicant’s stay in Lipovica Prison 35.
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2018:1127JUD005783709
27 novembre 2018
APPLICATION OF ARTICLE 41 OF THE CONVENTION 62.
ECLI:CEDH:001-153429
4 mars 2015
It held that the impugned headline was not a statement of facts but a value judgment expressed in connection to the applicant’s own statements and previous life-style.
ECLI:CE:ECHR:1975:1027JUD000446470
27 octobre 1975
Vilhjálmsson and Sir Gerald Fitzmaurice (Article 43 in fine of the Convention and Rule 21 para. 4) (art. 43). Mr.
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2011:0913DEC005517108
13 septembre 2011
Accordingly, this part of the application is manifestly ill-founded and must be rejected pursuant to Article 35 §§ 3 and 4 of the Convention. B.
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2006:1121DEC003882702
21 novembre 2006
It follows that this complaint is manifestly-ill founded, and must be rejected in accordance with Article 35 §§ 3 and 4 of the Convention. C.
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2022:0329DEC002556418
29 mars 2022
Alleged violation of Article 4 of Protocol No. 4 to the Convention and Article 13 of the Convention 58.
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2009:1006DEC000811807
6 octobre 2009
CASELAW;JUDGMENTS;GRANDCHAMBER;ENG
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2014:0916JUD002975009
16 septembre 2014
Derogations relating to detention under Article 15 of the European Convention on Human Rights and Article 4 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights THE LAW I.
ECLI:CEDH:001-111762
21 mai 2012
Was the applicant subjected to torture, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment in breach of Article 3 of the Convention following his apprehension by the police on 3 (or 4) July 2009