CodexAI

par KI

Workspace

Toutes les décisions2.7M+Récentes

Judiciaires

Cour de CassationCour d'AppelTribunal JudiciaireTrib. de Commerce

Administratives

Conseil d'ÉtatCour Admin. d'AppelTrib. Administratif

Codes de loi

Code civilCode du travailCode de commerceCode pénalCode procédure civileCGICode sécu. socialeCode de l'urbanismeCode de l'enviro.Code monétaire fin.

Droit social

Prud'hommes19KConventions coll.26KDoctrine fiscale14K

IA & Outils

IA JuridiqueNEWVeille hebdoNEWMCP ServerAPICitationsStatistiquesAlertes
ConnexionS'inscrire

CodexAI

RechercheJurisprudenceCodesCitationsStatistiquesAlertes
Juridiction
Tri
DeÀ
Avocat
Opérateurs : AND · OR · NOT · "…"
RechercheDécisionsCodesCPHAlertes
Exporter CSV

29 469 résultats pour « Becam »

TousCCCETACAACACPHTJTCOMCJUEPrud'h.Conv. coll.BOFIP IA

DÉCISION / ECLI

TYPE

DATE

EXTRAIT

CE

CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITY;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:2009:0324DEC004512306

Admin. suprême

24 mars 2009

24 mars 2009

The applicant became a party to the proceedings on 30   January   2004. The question therefore arises whether the applicant can complain about the overall duration of the proceedings.

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;CLIN;ENG

ECLI:CEDH:002-11558

Admin. suprême

27 juin 2017

27 juin 2017

The Bar Association subsequently became aware of his previous conviction which he had failed to mention in his application.

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITY;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:2010:0608DEC002376205

Admin. suprême

8 juin 2010

8 juin 2010

This decision became final on 22   December 2004. Having regard to the cumulative sentence and to the one relating to the first conviction, he was liable to detention for altogether 47 months.

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITY;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:2005:0830DEC002184304

Admin. suprême

30 août 2005

30 août 2005

penalty to the applicant was "most unfair", because if he had not alerted the authorities to the fact that someone had tampered with the cord which closed the vehicle, the authorities would never have become

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;RESOLUTIONS;EXECUTION;ENG

ECLI:CEDH:001-68054

Admin. suprême

22 décembre 2004

22 décembre 2004

appendix to this resolution, delivered on 7 February 2002, 21 February 2002, 19 March 2002, 28 January 2003, 8 April 2003 and 27 May 2003 and transmitted to the Committee of Ministers once they had become

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;RESOLUTIONS;EXECUTION;ENG

ECLI:CEDH:001-56014

Admin. suprême

17 décembre 2001

17 décembre 2001

the Convention”), Having regard to the judgment of the European Court of Human Rights in the Krčmář and others case delivered on 3 March 2000 and transmitted to the Committee of Ministers once it had become

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;CLIN;ENG

ECLI:CEDH:002-978

Admin. suprême

1 avril 2010

1 avril 2010

As he had waived his right to appeal, the judgment became final on the same day.

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;RESOLUTIONS;EXECUTION;ENG

ECLI:CEDH:001-102058

Admin. suprême

15 septembre 2010

15 septembre 2010

judgments of the European Court of Human Rights (hereinafter “the Convention” and “the Court”);   Having regard to the judgment in this case, transmitted by the Court to the Committee once it had become

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;RESOLUTIONS;EXECUTION;ENG

ECLI:CEDH:001-56335

Admin. suprême

6 janvier 2004

6 janvier 2004

of the European Court of Human Rights in 6 cases, details of which appear in the appendix to this resolution, delivered on 28 March 2002 and transmitted to the Committee of Ministers once they had become

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;JUDGMENTS;CHAMBER;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:2025:1125JUD003739821

Admin. suprême

25 novembre 2025

25 novembre 2025

    STRASBOURG 25 November 2025   FINAL   25/02/2026     This judgment has become final under Article 44 § 2 of the Convention. It may be subject to editorial revision.

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;RESOLUTIONS;EXECUTION;ENG

ECLI:CEDH:001-71146

Admin. suprême

26 octobre 2005

26 octobre 2005

Convention”),   Having regard to the judgment of the European Court of Human Rights in the Wessels-Bergervoet case delivered on 4 June 2002 and transmitted to the Committee of Ministers once it had become

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;CLIN;ENG

ECLI:CEDH:002-3859

Admin. suprême

10 mai 2005

10 mai 2005

During the investigation the Prime Minister called a press conference and issued a press release stating, inter alia , that days before a judgment of the Court of Appeal, it “[had] become known” that contacts

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;RESOLUTIONS;EXECUTION;ENG

ECLI:CEDH:001-56331

Admin. suprême

22 juillet 2002

22 juillet 2002

Court of Human Rights in the 11 cases, details of which appear in the appendix to this resolution, which were delivered on 25 September 2001 and transmitted to the Committee of Ministers once they had become

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;CLIN;ENG

ECLI:CEDH:002-13866

Admin. suprême

8 novembre 2022

8 novembre 2022

Eventually, he was not sanctioned since the prosecution became time-barred.

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;RESOLUTIONS;EXECUTION;ENG

ECLI:CEDH:001-81510

Admin. suprême

20 juin 2007

20 juin 2007

Convention”),   Having regard to the judgment of the European Court of Human Rights in the A.T. case delivered on 21   March 2002 and transmitted to the Committee of Ministers once it had become

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;RESOLUTIONS;EXECUTION;ENG

ECLI:CEDH:001-101029

Admin. suprême

15 septembre 2010

15 septembre 2010

execution of final judgments of the European Court of Human Rights (hereinafter “the Convention” and “the Court”);   Having regard to the judgment transmitted by the Court to the Committee once it had become

Source officielle
CA

Pôle 4 - Chambre 1

625bae6744cde4277d1bd5b2

Appel

15 avril 2022

15 avril 2022

à payer à la SCI Becarre la somme de 2 500 euros sur le fondement de l'article 700 du code de procédure civile ; - condamné la société Becarre à payer à la société Progerep et à la société Bureau Veritas

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITYCOM;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:2014:0506DEC000755906

Admin. suprême

6 mai 2014

6 mai 2014

On 28   December 2006 the judgment was upheld by the Briansk Regional Court and became final and enforceable. It was executed on 17 September 2007.

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;JUDGMENTS;CHAMBER;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:2008:1218JUD001397903

Admin. suprême

18 décembre 2008

18 décembre 2008

This judgment became binding on 31 January 1998. 7.

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;JUDGMENTS;CHAMBER;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:2007:0405JUD002009803

Admin. suprême

5 avril 2007

5 avril 2007

The judgment became final on 22 May 2001 when the Krasnodar Regional Court upheld it on appeal. The judgment remains unenforced because the Council does not have necessary funds. B.

Source officielle

Page 57 sur 1474

← PrécédentSuivant →

BODACC temporairement indisponible. Les annonces n’ont pas pu être vérifiées. Les résultats de jurisprudence restent consultables.