COUR D'APPEL D'AIX-EN-PROVENCE Chambre 4-4 ARRÊT AU FOND DU 26 OCTOBRE 2023 N° 2023/ NL/ Rôle N° RG 19/18671 - N° Portalis DBVB-V-B7D-BFIOH [O] [L] C/ SARL SERNET

By a final decision of 8   October 2003 the Senate of the Supreme Court (the “Senate”) dismissed their appeals.

On 9   June 2021 a letter sent by the Registry to the applicant’s attention was returned by the post on the grounds that the letter could not be delivered because the applicant had died.

On 30   October 2023 a letter sent by the Registry to the applicant’s attention was returned by the post on the grounds that the letter could not be delivered because the applicant had died.

On 13 August 2021 the Registry sent a letter, by registered post, to the applicant’s home address, asking him to submit his comments to the Government’s observations.

et B583B585, échange (1986-1987) : a) la délibération ; b) l'avis de France Domaine ; c) 1987 la promesse de vente ; d) les plans ; e) toute correspondance ; 3) 1N17 Lieu dit « Le Bout d'en Bas », sente

On 27 January 2023 a letter sent by the Registry to the applicant’s attention was returned by the post on the grounds that it could not be delivered because the applicant had died.

On 2   January 2025 a letter sent by the Registry to the applicant’s attention was returned by the post because it could not be delivered as the applicant had died.

L'ensemble des lots était destiné à la location mais la société Senex, exploitante qui, aux termes d'un avenant au bail commercial qui lui avait été consenti par la propriétaire, prévoyant la cession à

On 5 May 1987 the bill for road contribution costs was sent to C. On 15   June 1987 a final notice in respect of that bill was sent to C.

On 19 May 2001 it sent the case of its own motion to the Stara Zagora Regional Court.

  Paragraph 7.1.5 required that copies of documents sent to the parties had to contain a note indicating the date on which they had been sent and the signature of the person who had sent them.

In August 2005 the criminal case against the applicant was sent to the Stryi Town Court (“the Stryi Court”) for trial.

By letter dated 2 July 2012, sent by registered post, the applicant was notified that the period allowed for submission of his observations had expired on 15 May 2012 and that no extension of time had

By letters sent by registered post, the applicants were notified that the time allowed for the submission of their observations had expired (see the appended table for the relevant dates).

On 25 February 2008 the police completed the pre-trial investigation and sent the matter to the public prosecutor for consideration of possible charges.

The notification about the new date was sent to the applicant to the same incorrect address.

Only in late February [2004] we managed to find his relatives’ address and [we] sent him a telegramme, but his relatives refused to receive the telegramme.

The applicant eventually withdrew that claim, and on 9 May 2013 the Senate of the Supreme Court adopted a final decision relating to it. 22.

In the course of these proceedings he came into conflict with R., judge and subsequently presiding judge of the competent senate of the Tax Court.