CodexAI
AND
OR
NOT
"…"
DÉCISION / ECLI
TYPE
DATE
EXTRAIT
CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG
ECLI:CEDH:001-156680
10 juillet 2015
attempt to involve third parties in the tampering with evidence, was based on the fact that the applicant had transferred property in his daughter’s name, and the apparent complicity of a certain policeman
Page 38 sur 79
CASELAW;JUDGMENTS;CHAMBER;ENG
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2011:0915JUD002313604
15 septembre 2011
P., another policeman. At the material time the applicant had no formal procedural status in this latter case. 13. On 20 March 2000 case no. 91241 and case no. 8229 were joined. 14.
ECLI:CEDH:001-115715
31 mai 2010
This was further reflected in a number of incidents, one in which a policeman who was on duty at a polling station in Himara was injured; another in the pressure exerted upon other citizens who were casting
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2001:0717JUD002565994
17 juillet 2001
He added that the Security Directorate considered the allegations of the applicant and his lawyers regarding the alleged disappearance at the hands of the police to be an attempt to damage the police’s
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2018:0426JUD002749615
26 avril 2018
The police had not testified about this before the Board, but the Board had no reason to doubt the police’s assessment.
CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITYCOM;FRA;FRE
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2015:0917DEC006640811
17 septembre 2015
#xa0; 11080/12 05/01/2012 Nunzio GUELI 11/09/1948 Naples Maurizio ALBACHIARA 11081/12 05/01/2012 Mariarosaria PERRELLA 24/12/1952 Pollica
PRESS;CHAMBERJUDGMENTS;ENG
ECLI:CEDH:003-2584109-2798869
17 décembre 2008
Supreme Court of Justice, which found that the applicant’s guilt had been proved, despite observing that the investigation had been somewhat flawed and that “the evidence in the file indicated that the police’s
CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITY;ENG
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2000:0518DEC003870397
18 mai 2000
On 19 January 1984 the applicants challenged NAT’s order before the multi-member first instance civil court ( polimeles protodikio ) of Piraeus relying, inter alia, on the decision of the
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2013:0212JUD005021808
12 février 2013
In view of the findings of the domestic courts in the official liability case (see paragraph 11 above) according to which the applicant’s behaviour had not warranted the police’s use of force
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2013:0402DEC000258105
2 avril 2013
On 24 December 2003 the Berezneguvate prosecutor’s office quashed the police’s order of 17 July 2003 in its entirety. The seeds remained stored at the premises of company N.
ECLI:CEDH:001-201493
29 janvier 2020
5, 10 and 11 of the Convention and the ruling of the Plenary Supreme Court of Russia dated 27 June 2013 (concerning the application of the Convention by courts of general jurisdiction), the police’s
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2014:0930DEC001469008
30 septembre 2014
The applicant had protested verbally about the police’s actions and one of the policemen then instructed his colleagues to arrest the applicant too.
CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITYCOM;ENG
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2022:1110DEC001735419
10 novembre 2022
#xa0; 10 of the Convention and Article 333 of the Criminal Code (the offence of abuse of official powers), the applicants requested that a criminal investigation be opened in respect of the police’s
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2021:0316DEC006829117
16 mars 2021
legal circumstances calling for the reduction or refusal of the said compensation, as “according to the reports issued by the General Directorate of the Guardia Civil and the General Directorate of the Policia
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2023:1212DEC000674922
12 décembre 2023
The applicants stayed outside in the yard of the police station, where the police interviewed the first applicant, who stated that he had no objections to the police’s use of force and signed
CASELAW;DECISIONS;DECCOMMISSION;ENG
ECLI:CE:ECHR:1995:1129DEC002756795
29 novembre 1995
On 29 December 1989 the multi-member first instance civil court (Polimeles Protodikio) of Athens issued a preliminary decision ordering the applicant and Mrs.
ECLI:CEDH:001-120333
7 mai 2013
It could therefore not be said that the fact that the applicant had not been timely advised by counsel to make use of her right to remain silent had come about as a consequence of the police’s omission
Pôle 6 - Chambre 11
602d26d35258d13dbe7135be
16 février 2021
barreau de PARIS, toque : R021 substituée par Me Aurélie KLINSBOCCKEL, avocat au barreau de PARIS, toque : R021 INTIMÉS Monsieur [N] [H] [Adresse 2] [Localité 4] représenté par Me Anne POLICELLA
602d26d35258d13dbe7135bf
au barreau de PARIS, toque : R021 substituée par Me Aurélie KLINSBOCCKEL, avocat au barreau de PARIS, toque : R021 INTIMÉS Monsieur [C] [Y] [Adresse 6] [Localité 4] représenté par Me Anne POLICELLA
602d26d35258d13dbe7135c1
ANDRE-HESSE, avocat au barreau de PARIS, toque : R021 substitué par Me Aurélie KLINSBOCCKEL, avocat au barreau de PARIS INTIMÉS Monsieur [S] [U] [Adresse 2] [Localité 5] représenté par Me Anne POLICELLA