CodexAI
AND
OR
NOT
"…"
DÉCISION / ECLI
TYPE
DATE
EXTRAIT
CASELAW;JUDGMENTS;CHAMBER;ENG
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2020:0611JUD006901911
11 juin 2020
THE LAW ALLEGED VIOLATION OF ARTICLE 6 OF THE CONVENTION 35.
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2014:0304JUD001864010
4 mars 2014
    ALLEGED VIOLATION OF ARTICLE 6 OF THE CONVENTION 87.
CASELAW;JUDGMENTS;COMMITTEE;ENG
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2019:1217JUD006681217
17 décembre 2019
There has therefore been a violation of Article   6 §§   1 and 3   (d) of the Convention. 20.
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2015:1210JUD001796909
10 décembre 2015
    ALLEGED VIOLATION OF ARTICLE 6   §§   1 AND 3 (c) OF THE CONVENTION 40.
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2017:0216JUD000541713
16 février 2017
    There has accordingly been a violation of Article 6 §§ 1 and 3 of the Convention. 58.
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2021:0309JUD004705016
9 mars 2021
The applicant relied on Article   6   §§   1 and 3   (b) and (d) of the Convention, which, in so far as relevant, reads as follows: “1.
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2019:0709JUD007446710
9 juillet 2019
    There has accordingly been a violation of Article   6   §§   1 and 3   (d) of the Convention. 33.
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2014:0218JUD003153504
18 février 2014
    There has therefore been a violation of Article 6 § 3 (c) of the Convention in conjunction with Article 6 § 1 in the present case. 2.
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2018:0412JUD003480414
12 avril 2018
    ALLEGED VIOLATION OF ARTICLE 6 §§ 1 AND 3 (c) OF THE CONVENTION 60.
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2019:0604JUD006304113
4 juin 2019
    On 10   November 2015 notice of the complaint under Article   6   §   1 read together with Article 6 § 3 (c) concerning the absence of a lawyer during questioning was
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2019:1015JUD000139907
15 octobre 2019
    ALLEGED VIOLATION OF ARTICLE 6 §§ 1 AND 3 ( c ) OF THE CONVENTION 33.
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2021:0216JUD002200312
16 février 2021
    The applicant complained that the criminal proceedings against him had been unfair, contrary to the requirements of Article 6 §§ 1 and 3 (d) of the Convention, which read as follows: “1.
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2021:0216JUD001123012
    The applicant complained that the criminal proceedings against her had been unfair, contrary to the requirements of Article 6 §§ 1 and 3   (d) of the Convention, which read as follows
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2011:0125JUD005628209
25 janvier 2011
    ALLEGED VIOLATION OF ARTICLE 6 §§ 1 AND 3 (a) and (b) OF THE CONVENTION 15.
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2012:1108JUD003080407
8 novembre 2012
    The Government took the view that Article 6 § 3 (c) had been complied with.
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2016:0331JUD005528710
31 mars 2016
THE LAW ALLEGED VIOLATION OF ARTICLE 6 §§ 1 AND 3(d) OF THE CONVENTION 45.
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2013:0604JUD001493209
4 juin 2013
6 § 1 read in conjunction with Article 6 § 3 (d) of the Convention .
CASELAW;JUDGMENTS;CHAMBER;FRA;FRE
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2012:1016JUD002112404
16 octobre 2012
Violation de l'article 6+6-3-c - Droit à un procès équitable (Article 6 - Procédure pénale;Article 6-1 - Procès équitable;Egalité des armes) (Article 6-3-c - Se défendre avec l'assistance d'un défenseur
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2020:0303JUD001727413
3 mars 2020
Violation of Article 6+6-3-c - Right to a fair trial (Article 6 - Criminal proceedings;Article 6-1 - Fair hearing) (Article 6-3-c - Defence through legal assistance;Article 6 - Right to a fair trial)
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2019:1205JUD005346411
5 décembre 2019
Page 43 sur 58499