CodexAI
AND
OR
NOT
"…"
DÉCISION / ECLI
TYPE
DATE
EXTRAIT
CASELAW;JUDGMENTS;CHAMBER;ENG
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2016:1006JUD006890913
6 octobre 2016
After carefully reviewing the facts and the individual periods of delay encountered, it concluded that there had been a delay of ten months, from March 2008 to January 2009, in the holding of the Parole
Page 61 sur 1146
CASELAW;JUDGMENTS;COMMITTEE;ENG
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2019:0214JUD004558016
14 février 2019
In particular, he pointed to several discrete periods of delay. 27.
CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITY;ENG
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2003:0408DEC001439902
8 avril 2003
With respect to the argument on abuse of process, the applicant complained of the delay in the police investigation and submitted that this delay had allowed the contamination of the evidence of GL and
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2003:0916DEC000051502
16 septembre 2003
accounted for six months’ delay between January and July 1999.
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2003:1007DEC003657502
7 octobre 2003
They further submitted that the delay in enforcement violated their right to peaceful enjoyment of their possessions for six months.
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2000:0615DEC004943398
15 juin 2000
This adjournment resulted in a delay of eleven months. Part of this delay must be imputed to the parties who requested the adjournment in the first place.
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2000:0615DEC004043398
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2022:0315JUD000905118
15 mars 2022
The applicants therefore appear to have been responsible for some of the delay. 10.
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2015:0303JUD000296312
3 mars 2015
He considered that there was no excuse for the delay in providing him with access to the SOTP BNM. 37.
CASELAW;CLIN;ENG
ECLI:CEDH:002-1258
3 novembre 2009
’s repayment scheme for foreign currency deposited before the dissolution of the SFRY: violation Article 46 Article 46-2 Execution of judgment Measures of a general character Delays in implementation
PRESS;CHAMBERJUDGMENTS;ENG
ECLI:CEDH:003-2143208-2275743
18 octobre 2007
The Court concluded that the first formal response to the registration request of 12 September 2001 was issued only on 27 January 2003, a delay of more than one year and four months.
CASELAW;RESOLUTIONS;EXECUTION;ENG
ECLI:CEDH:001-186837
20 septembre 2018
The Court concluded that the delay in payment imposed an individual and excessive burden on the applicants (violation of Article 1 of Protocol No. 1). I.
JURIDIC.PREMIER PRESIDENT
64d5cfae9c17ddd969ec6246
10 août 2023
D'APPEL DE BORDEAUX Vu l'ordonnance de fixation en collégialité du 16 décembre 2022 de la première présidente ; Vu le renvoi de l'affaire devant la formation collégiale composée de : Isabelle DELAQUYS
Jurid. Premier Président
660f94f4a40f8b0008cb73d9
4 avril 2024
statuer à l'occasion des procédures ouvertes en application des articles L.3211-12 et suivants du code de la santé publique, statuant contradictoirement et en dernier ressort, Assisté de Gwendoline DELAFOY
RETENTIONS
65a77fce8121050008662cb3
16 janvier 2024
sur les procédures ouvertes en application des articles L.342-7, L. 342-12, L. 743-11 et L. 743-21 du code d'entrée et de séjour des étrangers en France et du droit d'asile, Assistée de Gwendoline DELAFOY
65a77fd68121050008662cb7
65ab72cd36bfc00008d68ca0
19 janvier 2024
3ème CHAMBRE FAMILLE
5fca2b4316bccbbe130a64e4
1 décembre 2020
articles 786 et 912 du cpc, l'affaire a été débattue le 20 octobre 2020 en chambre du conseil, les avocats ne s'y étant pas opposés, devant Françoise ROQUES, Conseiller chargé du rapport, et de Isabelle DELAQUYS
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2016:1110JUD000242309
10 novembre 2016
Mindful of the subsequent delays caused by the applicant’s actions, as discussed above, the Court finds however that the initial delay of twelve years (1992-2004), for which no justification
CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITYCOM;ENG
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2021:1110DEC001298121
10 novembre 2021
The delay in serving had been explained by the applicant’s lawyer’s failure to collect the judgment within the set time-limit.