By letter dated 12 September 2019, sent by registered post to the contact person indicated by the applicant in the application form, the applicant was notified that the period allowed for submission of

By letter dated 2 September 2019, sent by registered post, the applicant was notified that the period allowed for submission of his observations   had expired on 30 August 2018 and that no extension

The observations were sent for comments to the applicant’s representative, but she did not comment on this specific issue.

anonyme Domezon et Cie, l'Entreprise "Génie civil de Lens", la Société Isolex prise en la personne de son syndic, Maître Y..., l'Union des Assurances de Paris, la Société d'Etudes d'Ensemble Technique (SEET

LIQUIDATION JUDICIAIRE SIMPLIFIÉE Par jugement en date du 14 octobre 2025, le Tribunal a ouvert une procédure de redressement judiciaire à l'égard de : SAS GARAGE DE LA CHARBONNIERE 2 bis rue de la Sente

By letter dated 22 February 2022, sent through the Court’s Electronic Communications Service (eComms), the applicant’s representative was invited to submit, on behalf of the applicant, the written observations

By letters dated 5 July and 6 October 2023, sent by registered post, the applicant was notified that the period allowed for submission of his observations   had expired on 10 November 2022 and that

By letter dated 25 September 2014, sent by registered post, the applicant’s representative was notified that the period allowed for submission of his observations had expired on 1 September 2014 and that

    By a letter dated 30 September 2010, the Government’s observations were sent to the applicant’s representative, who was requested to submit any claims for just satisfaction by 10 November

By letter dated 6 March   2009 the Government’s observations were sent to the applicant, who was requested to submit any comments together with any claims for just satisfaction in reply by 20 &#xa0

By letter dated 8 October 2014 the Government’s observations were sent to the applicant’s representative, who was requested to submit any observations in reply, together with any claims for just satisfaction

By letter dated 8 February 2019, sent to the applicant’s representative through the Court’s Electronic Communications Service (eComms), the applicant’s representative was requested to inform the Court

By letter dated 27 January 2016, sent by registered post, the applicant was notified that the period allowed for submission of his observations had expired on 7 January 2016 and that no extension of time

By a letter of 26 February 2009 the Government’s observations were sent to the applicant, who was requested to submit any observations in reply by 9   April 2009, together with any claims for just

On 8 February 2023 the Registry sent a letter to the applicant inviting her to inform the Court, whether, in view of the latest factual developments, she wished to maintain the application.

By letter dated 4 November 2014, sent by registered post, the applicant was notified that the period allowed for submission of his observations had expired on 11 September 2014 and that no extension of

These observations were sent to the applicant on 4 June 2013. The applicant was invited to submit his observations in reply, together with his claims for just satisfaction by 16 July 2013.

On 10 January 2019 the Registry sent a letter to the applicant’s representative inviting him to inform the Court as to whether the applicant had had, or intended to have, recourse to the remedy in question

By letter dated 6 July 2009, sent by registered post and by fax, the applicant’s representative Mr H.Tuna was notified that the period allowed for submission of the observations had expired on 10 June

By a letter dated 2 April 2009 the Government’s observations were sent to the applicant, who was requested to submit any observations, together with any claims for just satisfaction, in reply by 20 May