CodexAI
AND
OR
NOT
"…"
DÉCISION / ECLI
TYPE
DATE
EXTRAIT
CASELAW;REPORTS;ENG
ECLI:CE:ECHR:1993:1130REP001785191
30 novembre 1993
Disciplinary Code of Lower Saxony): Section 2 para. 1: (German) "Nach diesem Gesetz kann
Page 55 sur 59
ECLI:CE:ECHR:1990:0712REP001262987
12 juillet 1990
The letter states that "the conversation listened to can in any event probably not be used as evidence against the accused" ("Als Beweismittel gegen den Angeschuldigten kann das mitgehörte Gespräch
ECLI:CE:ECHR:1995:1207REP001469689
7 décembre 1995
[German] "Der Verwaltungsgerichtshof kann ungeachtet eines Parteiantrages nach Abs. 1 Z. 1 von einer Verhandlung absehen, wenn
CASELAW;JUDGMENTS;CHAMBER;ENG
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2010:0624JUD003014104
24 juin 2010
Referring to Karner v. Austria (no. 40016/98, § 37, ECHR 2003 ‑ IX), they argued that such a difference could only be justified by “particularly serious reasons”.
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2015:1215JUD003057508
15 décembre 2015
France , no. 55929/00, § 29, 5 July 2005; and Karner v. Austria , no. 40016/98, §§ 25-27, ECHR 2003 ‑ IX). 68. In a more recent case Ergezen v.
CASELAW;JUDGMENTS;GRANDCHAMBER;ENG
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2016:1020JUD000733413
20 octobre 2016
The relevant provisions of the Enforcement of Prison Sentences Act ( Zakon o izvršavanju kazne zatvora , Official Gazette no.
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2011:0531JUD004990507
31 mai 2011
The relevant provisions of the Enforcement of Prison Sentences Act ( Zakon o izvršavanju kazne zatvora , Official Gazette nos.
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2010:0928JUD003706006
28 septembre 2010
Moreover, the margin of appreciation accorded to States in that case had been significantly narrowed by the Court’s judgment in Karner v. Austria , no. 40016/98, ECHR 2003 ‑ IX.
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2019:1031JUD002161316
31 octobre 2019
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2016:0630JUD005136209
30 juin 2016
They explained that they were merely asking the Court to develop its decision in Karner v.
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2019:0319JUD004834316
19 mars 2019
Execution of Sentences Act ( Zakon o izvršenju kazni zatvora, novčane kazne i mjera bezbjednosti ; published in OGM no. 036⁄15) 105. This Act entered
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2014:1204JUD000590113
4 décembre 2014
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2010:0408JUD004052308
8 avril 2010
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2013:1107JUD003191307
7 novembre 2013
This holds true all the more if the leading issue raised by the case transcends the person and the interests of the applicant and his heirs and may affect others (see Karner v.
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2016:0112JUD004035511
12 janvier 2016
application even in the absence of any heirs of the direct victim in order to contribute to elucidate, safeguard and develop the standards of protection under the Convention (see, mutatis mutandis , Karner
CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG
ECLI:CEDH:001-214413
23 novembre 2021
Constitutional Court Restriction of access to the investigation file Lack of relevant and sufficient reasons for detention No effective remedy to compensation Lack of reasonable suspicion 172 1379/20 Kaan
CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITY;ENG
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2009:0618DEC002019805
18 juin 2009
a habeas corpus application (see, among many authorities, Civil Appeal no. 12166 concerning the application of Elena Bondar for Habeas Corpus, judgment of 30 December 2004 – full bench; Sarkisasvili Kaha
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2018:1025JUD003845012
25 octobre 2018
Worauf ich gesagt habe: "Nein, ich war’s nicht, aber es ist nachzulesen, es ist nicht wirklich ein Geheimnis. " Und sie: "Das kann man doch so nicht sagen."
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2013:1017JUD003604409
17 octobre 2013
On 9 March 1998 the applicant lodged a request for the extraordinary mitigation of his sentence ( zahtjev za izvanredno ublažavanje kazne ) and a request for extraordinary review of a final
ECLI:CE:ECHR:1991:0910REP001437988
10 septembre 1991
xa0; Untersuchungsrichter, Staatsanwaltschaft und Anklagekammer werden daher nach Vornahme der wenigen Untersuchungshandlungen, bezüglich welcher noch eine gewisse Kollusionsgefahr angenommen werden kann