Juridiction
Tri
DeÀ
Avocat
Opérateurs : AND · OR · NOT · "…"CodexAI
AND · OR · NOT · "…"DÉCISION / ECLI
TYPE
DATE
EXTRAIT
CASELAW;JUDGMENTS;CHAMBER;ENG
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2008:1106JUD004949206
6 novembre 2008
6 novembre 2008
Romania and Hungary , no. 71099/01, §§ 69-85, 5 April 2005 ; Eskinazi and Chelouche v. Turkey (dec.), no. 14600/05, ECHR 2005 ‑ XIII; Karadžić v.
Source officielleCASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITY;ENG
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2010:1102DEC000723908
2 novembre 2010
2 novembre 2010
decision-making process leading to the adoption of the impugned measures by the domestic court was fair and allowed those concerned to present their case fully (see Tiemann , cited above, and Eskinazi and Chelouche
Source officielleCASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITY;ENG
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2012:0515DEC001342012
15 mai 2012
15 mai 2012
decision-making process leading to the adoption of the impugned measures by the domestic court was fair and allowed those concerned to present their case fully (see Tiemann , cited above, and Eskinazi and Chelouche
Source officielleCASELAW;JUDGMENTS;CHAMBER;ENG
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2011:1213JUD002785309
13 décembre 2011
13 décembre 2011
particular, the Court shall assess whether the decision-making process leading to the interference was fair and such as to afford due respect to the interests safeguarded by this Article (see Eskinazi and Chelouche
Source officiellePage 6 sur 6