CodexAI
AND
OR
NOT
"…"
DÉCISION / ECLI
TYPE
DATE
EXTRAIT
CASELAW;JUDGMENTS;CHAMBER;ENG
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2017:0404JUD000274212
4 avril 2017
On that occasion A.Pi. mentioned the applicant as her contact in the Fund. She also stated that everybody should make out well in this business undertaking.
Page 8 sur 10
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2009:0625JUD003693202
25 juin 2009
The Russian Constitution of 12 December 1993 establishes that a judicial decision is required before a defendant can be detained or his or her detention extended (Article 22).
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2008:0124JUD002978703
24 janvier 2008
Bracke , Attaché, Head of Department, Border Inspection Department, Aliens Office, Federal Department of the Interior, Ms T.
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2009:0423JUD003694102
23 avril 2009
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2016:0317JUD000719304
17 mars 2016
The applicant’s sister complained to the Governor of Kharkiv SIZO about the conditions of her brother’s detention.
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2004:0311JUD004234698
11 mars 2004
The central heating pipes in cells for special regime prisoners were covered by a layer of bricks.
CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITY;ENG
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2011:0215DEC003849405
15 février 2011
The cell was dirty, toilet was clogged and bricks covered the windows leaving only a small hole for air. The applicant was placed there with sixteen other detainees. The cell was not properly lit.
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2009:0127JUD000170406
27 janvier 2009
As to the toilet, it consisted of a hole in the ground and two cemented bricks for placing the feet. There was no sink, and the water tap was set just above the toilet hole.
ECLI:CE:ECHR:1985:0528JUD000822578
28 mai 1985
For these reasons, Lord Justice Bridge, with whom Lords Justice Cumming-Bruce and Brightman concurred, was in favour of dismissing the appeal.
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2012:1023JUD000426506
23 octobre 2012
The toilet was located in the corner of the cell near the entrance door and was separated from the living area of the cell by a brick wall which was one metre high and ensured the privacy of the person
CASELAW;JUDGMENTS;COMMITTEE;ENG
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2020:0910JUD004631108
10 septembre 2020
The prosecutor noted that company K. decreased the width of the wall near the applicants’ balcony by half a brick width; M. could not reconstruct the premises without the approved project, while it was
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2011:0210JUD000157207
10 février 2011
Some of them told the second applicant that her three sons were being kept inside the poultry ‑ house. The second applicant waited for her sons' release for the next three days. 15.
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2016:0112JUD004035511
12 janvier 2016
I.B. also saw the villagers chasing his sons and attacking them with stones, bats and bricks. 9 .
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2013:0122JUD003250111
22 janvier 2013
A., who stated that her husband had been abducted by law-enforcement agents and whose statement was similar to the one given by Mr Ya. S. on 1 June 2011. 62.
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2011:0621JUD002064104
21 juin 2011
The Russian Constitution of 12 December 1993 establishes that a judicial decision is required before a defendant can be detained or his or her detention extended (Article 22). 55.
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2007:0607JUD003400002
7 juin 2007
The pan was separated from the living area by a one ‑ metre ‑ high brick wall. Inmates were allowed to take a shower once a week.
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2004:1116DEC004881799
16 novembre 2004
The Constitution and the Constitutional Court's practice Article 48(2) of the Constitution provides, inter alia , that every person has the right to have his or her case tried without unjustified
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2011:0607DEC002201810
7 juin 2011
The applicant and his fellow detainees were allowed twenty minutes of daily outdoor exercise, which took place in a small yard measuring 6x4 m, surrounded by a brick wall.
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2014:0430JUD003785808
30 avril 2014
It was separated from the living area of the cell by a brick or metal screen 1.75 or 1.65 m high which ensured privacy. The distance between the toilet and the dining table was at least 1.5 metres.
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2018:0419JUD004184112
19 avril 2018
Only the accused or his or her lawyer, and the public prosecutor, have the right to challenge jurors; the civil party may not do so.