Judgment of the Court of 25 July 1991.#Marc Rich & Co. AG v Società Italiana Impianti PA.#Reference for a preliminary ruling: Court of Appeal - United Kingdom.

Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 9 August 1994.#European Parliament v Mireille Meskens.

The court also partially upheld the applicant’s counter-claim, ordering the Ministry to extend the lease agreement in respect of the part of the property of 134 sq. m and to put it at the applicant’s disposal

Cour Eur.

Arrêt de la Cour (troisième chambre) du 18 mars 1982.#Manfred Burg contre Cour de justice des Communautés européennes.#Fonctionnaire - Indemnité d'installation.#Affaire 90/81.

Sentenza della Corte (Seconda Sezione) del 21 giugno 1984.#Charles Lux contro Corte dei conti dell'unione europea.#Causa C-69/83.

SOLIDAIRE INSTITUT MEDICO-EDUCATIF [6] INFIRMATION Grosse délivrée le à REPUBLIQUE FRANCAISE AU NOM DU PEUPLE FRANCAIS *** COUR

[U] informé des courriers reçus de la part des salariés et avez même omis de lui transmettre les courriers à transmettre aux collaborateurs.

L'appel défère à la cour la connaissance des chefs de jugement qu'il critique expressément et ceux qui en dépendent : Article 562 du code de procédure civile : L'appel défère à la cour la connaissance

Sentenza della Corte (Prima Sezione) del 7 luglio 1964.#Umberto Collotti contro Corte di giustizia dell'Unione europea.#Causa C-70/63.

Sentenza della Corte (Prima Sezione) del 6 febbraio 1986.#Androniki Vlachou contro Corte dei conti dell'unione europea.#Causa C-143/84.

Sentenza della Corte (Quarta Sezione) del 19 gennaio 1988.#Erich Biedermann contro Corte dei conti dell'unione europea.#Causa C-2/87.

  On 1   December 2001, on the basis of the Court’s judgment, the applicant association applied to the Federal Court for a review of the final domestic judgment prohibiting the commercial from

THE COURT’S ASSESSMENT 7.

Reiteration of Court's case-law on concept of "impartial" tribunal. Subjective test: personal impartiality of the judge not disputed.

    The Court’s Rule 39 indication On 21 April 2010 the President of the First Section decided to apply interim measures under Rule 39 of the Rules of Court in the applicant’s case, requesting

He argued that the insolvency court was acting contrary to the law and the Supreme Court’s case-law. 6.

Par requête en date du 9 juin 2022 [U] [Z] a saisi la cour d'appel d'Agen d'un déféré, afin de voir réformer l'ordonnance du 25 mai 2022 au motif que le délai de péremption court à compter de la notification

The Court reiterated that freedom to express opinions in the course of a peaceful assembly was so important that it could not be restricted in any way, so long as the person concerned did not commit any

the Supreme Court’s supervision.