CodexAI
AND
OR
NOT
"…"
DÉCISION / ECLI
TYPE
DATE
EXTRAIT
CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG
ECLI:CEDH:001-243804
21 mai 2025
QUESTION TO THE PARTIES Can the applicants still claim to be “victims”, within the meaning of Article 34 of the Convention, of a violation of their rights under Article 8 of the Convention read in conjunction
soc
61372294cd580146773feb86
12 décembre 1995
Mohamed Reza X..., demeurant ..., défendeur à la cassation ; LA COUR, en l'audience publique du 14 novembre 1995, où étaient présents : M.
CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITY;ENG
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2001:0520DEC003338296
20 mai 2001
Since the 1996 Criminal Law Amendment Act ( Strafrechtsänderungsgesetz ) the last sentence of Section 35 § 2 reads as follows: “Such communication may be dispensed with if the prosecutor merely supports
ECLI:CEDH:001-173352
6 avril 2017
The relevant part of the decision reads as follows: “In accordance with Article 80 of the Civil Code, a legal entity is an organisation established and registered in accordance with the law, having civil
ECLI:CEDH:001-139697
27 novembre 2013
The District Court held that the Moscow State University experts did not define the terms “a reader who is emotionally involved in religion”, “a normal attitude to the text”, “a potentially inadequate
ECLI:CEDH:001-121920
29 mai 2013
    Relevant domestic law Article 220(6) of the Criminal Code read, at the time of the events, as follows: “...Anyone who commits a crime on behalf of the (illegal) organisation, even if they
ECLI:CEDH:001-157358
24 août 2015
of the court has declined to summon him pursuant to Article 333 § 2 [for example, because, upon the lodging of the bill of indictment, the prosecution has asked that the records of his testimony be read
CASELAW;CLIN;ENG
ECLI:CEDH:002-10544
12 mai 2015
Law – Article 3 read in conjunction with Article   14 (second to fourteenth applicants) (a)     Whether the attack on the applicants reached the minimum threshold of severity under Article
CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITYCOM;ENG
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2026:0409DEC002036724
9 avril 2026
The applicants’ complaints under Article   13 of the Convention and Article   14 of the Convention read in conjunction with Article   8 and/or Article   1 of Protocol No.
ECLI:CEDH:001-201703
14 février 2020
Section 2 reads, in so far as relevant: “1.
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2003:0109DEC001287702
9 janvier 2003
    Relevant domestic law The relevant part of the Civil Obligations Act ( Zakon o obveznim odnosima ) reads as follows: Section 180(1) “Responsibility for loss caused by death or bodily injury
ECLI:CEDH:001-150884
7 janvier 2015
Having read the search order the applicant voluntarily surrendered the computer concerned.
ECLI:CEDH:001-191399
7 février 2019
their positive obligation to protect them from discrimination and to conduct an effective investigation into their allegations of discrimination on grounds of sexual orientation contrary to Article 14 read
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2010:0608DEC003169505
8 juin 2010
Article 6 § 1, in so far as relevant, reads: “In the determination of his civil rights and obligations ... everyone is entitled to a ... hearing within a reasonable time by [a] ... tribunal ...”
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2006:1114DEC001417203
14 novembre 2006
Article 6   § 1 of the Convention reads in so far as relevant: “In the determination of ... any criminal charge against him, everyone is entitled to a ... hearing within a reasonable time by [a] .
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2006:1121DEC001571003
21 novembre 2006
Article 13 reads as follows: “Everyone whose rights and freedoms as set forth in [the] Convention are violated shall have an effective remedy before a national authority notwithstanding that the violation
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2003:0522DEC001531902
22 mai 2003
The relevant parts of the Act Amending the Civil Obligations Act ( Zakon o izmjenama i dopunama Zakona o obveznim odnosima – Official Gazette no. 7/1996) read as follows: Section 1 “Section 180 of the
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2008:0930DEC007761101
30 septembre 2008
THE LAW Article 37 of the Convention, as far as relevant, reads as follows: “1.
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2017:0926DEC001317307
26 septembre 2017
    The victim, Ms T., did not appear in court and her pre-trial statements were read out at the trial.
ECLI:CEDH:001-155549
29 mai 2015
It found that the phrase infringed the principle of equal treatment and was hence discriminatory and in violation of Article 14 read in conjunction with Article 8 of the Convention, as there was no objective
Page 37 sur 1410
BODACC temporairement indisponible. Les annonces n’ont pas pu être vérifiées. Les résultats de jurisprudence restent consultables.