CodexAI
AND
OR
NOT
"…"
DÉCISION / ECLI
TYPE
DATE
EXTRAIT
CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITY;FRA;FRE
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2013:0514DEC000898110
14 mai 2013
The Government’s acknowledgment of a violation of Article 6 § 1, Article 3, Article 8 and Article 13 of the Convention and its acceptance of the claim for compensation in the amount of 15,000 euros per
Page 39 sur 361
CASELAW;JUDGMENTS;CHAMBER;ENG
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2004:1021JUD007800801
21 octobre 2004
by those of Article 6 § 1 (see, notably, Osu v.
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2009:1013JUD001853205
13 octobre 2009
There has therefore been a violation of Article 6 § 3 (c) of the Convention in conjunction with Article 6 § 1 in the present case. II.
CASELAW;JUDGMENTS;COMMITTEE;ENG
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2021:0119JUD006265712
19 janvier 2021
In these circumstances, the Court does not consider that a further oral hearing before the appeal court was required for the purposes of Article 5 § 4 (see Altınok , cited above, §§ 54-55, 29
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2004:1209JUD001181402
9 décembre 2004
of Article 13 since its requirements are less strict than, and are here absorbed by those of Article 6 § 1 (see, among other authorities, Osu v.
Cour d'Appel
6253ccdbbd3db21cbdd9182c
23 juin 2014
Mme X... a fait délivrer à son mari le 17 avril 2008 une assignation en divorce sur le fondement de l'article 242 du code civil.
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2008:0424JUD000508205
24 avril 2008
ALLEGED VIOLATION OF ARTICLE 6 § 1 OF THE CONVENTION AND ARTICLE 1 OF PROTOCOL No. 1 15.
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2009:1210JUD001286805
10 décembre 2009
He relied on Articles 6 § 1 and 13 of the Convention and Article 1 of Protocol No.
CASELAW;JUDGMENTS;GRANDCHAMBER;ENG
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2001:0123JUD002834295
23 janvier 2001
Under Article 41 of the Convention, the applicant sought just satisfaction amounting to several hundred thousand United States dollars in respect of damage sustained and also for costs and
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2010:0408JUD000850305
8 avril 2010
26864/03, §§ 55 and 59, 26 June 2008). 22.
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2008:0520JUD003440002
20 mai 2008
There has accordingly been a breach of Article 13. III. APPLICATION OF ARTICLE 41 OF THE CONVENTION 43.
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2006:1214JUD004247604
14 décembre 2006
She invoked Article 6 § 1 of the Convention and Article 1 of Protocol No. 1.
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2006:1207JUD004247504
7 décembre 2006
comm
ECLI:FR:CCASS:2019:CO10480
11 décembre 2019
L.642-19, L.642-37-2, et R. 662-1 du code de commerce et l'article 670-1 du code de procédure civile.
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2020:0901JUD002996418
1 septembre 2020
It ordered that costs be paid by the defendant. 10.
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2024:0206JUD005069320
6 février 2024
Article 35 § 4 of the Convention. 8.
CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITY;ENG
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2007:0403DEC002945302
3 avril 2007
In the absence of a finding of a breach of Article 5, paragraphs 1 to 4 of the Convention, Article 5 § 5 is not applicable in the present case.
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2022:0920JUD001391114
20 septembre 2022
Ukraine (no. 28718/09, § 55, 5 March 2015). APPLICATION OF ARTICLE 41 OF THE CONVENTION 16.
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2006:0921JUD006190800
21 septembre 2006
There has accordingly been a violation of Article 5 § 3 of the Convention. II. ALLEGED VIOLATION OF ARTICLE 6 § 1 OF THE CONVENTION 25.
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2014:1113JUD008090912
13 novembre 2014
Head V – Victim and Private Prosecutor Article 55 “(1) Where the State Attorney finds no grounds to prosecute ... it shall notify the injured party within eight days and inform that party