CodexAI

par KI

Workspace

Toutes les décisions2.7M+Récentes

Judiciaires

Cour de CassationCour d'AppelTribunal JudiciaireTrib. de Commerce

Administratives

Conseil d'ÉtatCour Admin. d'AppelTrib. Administratif

Codes de loi

Code civilCode du travailCode de commerceCode pénalCode procédure civileCGICode sécu. socialeCode de l'urbanismeCode de l'enviro.Code monétaire fin.

Droit social

Prud'hommes19KConventions coll.26KDoctrine fiscale14K

IA & Outils

IA JuridiqueNEWVeille hebdoNEWMCP ServerAPICitationsStatistiquesAlertes
ConnexionS'inscrire

CodexAI

RechercheJurisprudenceCodesCitationsStatistiquesAlertes
Juridiction
Tri
DeÀ
Avocat
Opérateurs : AND · OR · NOT · "…"
RechercheDécisionsCodesCPHAlertes
Exporter CSV

31 923 résultats pour « Becaud »

TousCCCETACAACACPHTJTCOMCJUEPrud'h.Conv. coll.BOFIP IA

DÉCISION / ECLI

TYPE

DATE

EXTRAIT

CE

CASELAW;DECISIONS;DECCOMMISSION;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:1988:1215DEC001080284

Admin. suprême

15 décembre 1988

15 décembre 1988

invoked by the applicant because he had prior to the trial expressly renounced challenging these judges.

Source officielle

Page 88 sur 1597

← PrécédentSuivant →
CE

CASELAW;JUDGMENTS;CHAMBER;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:2017:0314JUD003621613

Admin. suprême

14 mars 2017

14 mars 2017

He expresses fear of the father because he does not know how the father would behave. He stated that he likes it in I. because before he was afraid and had to listen to the parents fighting.

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;JUDGMENTS;CHAMBER;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:2014:1127JUD003670109

Admin. suprême

27 novembre 2014

27 novembre 2014

    On 11 April 2005 the applicant union held the strike as planned because under the domestic law its appeal prevented the County Court’s judgment from becoming final.

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITY;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:2012:0710DEC006211010

Admin. suprême

10 juillet 2012

10 juillet 2012

The second assessment, made by the Goodman Team, was also unreliable because it relied heavily upon the earlier flawed Abbeyfield assessment and because the Team were geared from the outset towards the

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITY;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:2004:0406DEC006841601

Admin. suprême

6 avril 2004

6 avril 2004

The charge that McDonald's food is very unhealthy because it is high in fat, sugar, animal products and salt (sodium), and low in fibre, vitamins and minerals, and because eating it more than just occasionally

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITY;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:2003:1113DEC004323198

Admin. suprême

13 novembre 2003

13 novembre 2003

A second hearing was scheduled for 30 June 1998 because Ms M.V. and two other witnesses failed to show up.

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;JUDGMENTS;CHAMBER;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:2023:0530JUD004506617

Admin. suprême

30 mai 2023

30 mai 2023

The Finnish court obviously did not prove that, nor did it try to prove it at all, because it does not concern them – and it does not concern them because they did not even put Mesić on trial, and therefore

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;JUDGMENTS;CHAMBER;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:2022:0301JUD002312616

Admin. suprême

1 mars 2022

1 mars 2022

the offence in question to exist, and because such an analysis would have given the impression that the act, that was classified as an offence by the law, was less dangerous.

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;JUDGMENTS;CHAMBER;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:2019:1024JUD003294917

Admin. suprême

24 octobre 2019

24 octobre 2019

It may be that it is because applications are being refused. Or it may be because claimants are bridging the gap in other ways.” 20 .

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITY;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:2001:1023DEC005072099

Admin. suprême

23 octobre 2001

23 octobre 2001

He also complained that he had been denied effective access to an amparo appeal to the Constitutional Court because of the shortcomings of the legal assistance provided to him.

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITY;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:2019:1022DEC003671210

Admin. suprême

22 octobre 2019

22 octobre 2019

As to the third defendant, who was the mayor of the village, she stated that she had included him in the action because his signature was on the letter. 11.

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITYCOM;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:2018:0410DEC005040815

Admin. suprême

10 avril 2018

10 avril 2018

The decision in respect of Mr   Vereš became final on 17   October 2012, and the decision in respect of Mr   Kocjančič became final on 29   September 2012. 7.

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG

ECLI:CEDH:001-174309

Admin. suprême

16 mai 2017

16 mai 2017

The shower could be used only once a week for twenty minutes, while the detainees also had to wash their clothes because there was no hot water in the cells. There was no privacy during the shower.

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;JUDGMENTS;CHAMBER;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:2006:1102JUD001596902

Admin. suprême

2 novembre 2006

2 novembre 2006

However, that hearing was adjourned because the parties defaulted.

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITYCOM;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:2025:0710DEC001172323

Admin. suprême

10 juillet 2025

10 juillet 2025

He was housed in a single room, which he needed because it allowed him to control electronic devices using his voice and gave him the privacy needed for personal hygiene. 4 .

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG

ECLI:CEDH:001-115570

Admin. suprême

10 décembre 2012

10 décembre 2012

The decision became final as the guardian ad litem , Prague 4 Municipal Office, waived its right of appeal.

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITY;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:2002:1107DEC006123700

Admin. suprême

7 novembre 2002

7 novembre 2002

On 31 December 1998 the statutory limitation for payment of the court fees expired and the issue thus became irrelevant.

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITY;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:2011:0920DEC002235010

Admin. suprême

20 septembre 2011

20 septembre 2011

He further complained that he had been discriminated against based on his employment status because had he not been employed his pension would be higher.

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG

ECLI:CEDH:001-123803

Admin. suprême

11 juillet 2013

11 juillet 2013

She says that she did not tell about the incidents sooner because she was afraid, because her safety and the safety of her family members were threatened.”

Source officielle
CE

CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITY;ENG

ECLI:CE:ECHR:2004:0708DEC001413903

Admin. suprême

8 juillet 2004

8 juillet 2004

The judgment was not appealed against and became final on 10 November 2003.

Source officielle