Juridiction
Tri
DeÀ
Avocat
Opérateurs : AND · OR · NOT · "…"CodexAI
AND · OR · NOT · "…"DÉCISION / ECLI
TYPE
DATE
EXTRAIT
CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITYCOM;ENG
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2014:0401DEC007557211
1 avril 2014
1 avril 2014
The applicants complained under Article 6 of the Convention and Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 to the Convention of the non-enforcement of the final judgment adopted in their favour against the Republika
Source officielleCASELAW;JUDGMENTS;CHAMBER;ENG
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2007:0412JUD007513601
12 avril 2007
12 avril 2007
The applicant alleged, in particular, a violation of Article 6 of the Convention and Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 in that the judgment in his favour had not been enforced in good time. 4.
Source officielleCASELAW;JUDGMENTS;COMMITTEE;ENG
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2025:1023JUD006080617
23 octobre 2025
23 octobre 2025
The applicants complained of the delayed enforcement of the domestic judgment given in their favour. They relied on Article 6 § 1 of the Convention. 8.
Source officielleCASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITYCOM;ENG
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2012:0110DEC000147207
10 janvier 2012
10 janvier 2012
The applicant complained under Articles 8, 13 and 17 of, and Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 to, the Convention of the non-enforcement of the final judgment adopted in his favour against the
Source officielleCASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITYCOM;ENG
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2018:0925DEC003310416
25 septembre 2018
25 septembre 2018
COMPLAINT The applicant complained under Articles 6 and 13 of the Convention about the non-enforcement of final domestic court decision rendered in his favour against socially-owned company.
Source officielleCASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITY;ENG
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2010:0907DEC002274206
7 septembre 2010
7 septembre 2010
On 12 April 2006 the Ciocana District Court found in the applicant Church's favour and annulled the decision of 17 March 2006.
Source officielleCASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITYCOM;ENG
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2016:0202DEC003079013
2 février 2016
2 février 2016
On 28 October 2009 the Bosilegrad Municipal Court ordered the enforcement of the final judgment rendered in favour of the applicant.
Source officielleCASELAW;JUDGMENTS;CHAMBER;ENG
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2007:0412JUD007503201
12 avril 2007
12 avril 2007
The applicant alleged, in particular, a violation of Article 6 of the Convention and Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 in that the judgment in his favour had not been enforced in good time. 4.
Source officielleCASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITYCOM;ENG
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2021:0121DEC004123919
21 janvier 2021
21 janvier 2021
Protocol No. 1 (non-enforcement or delayed enforcement of domestic decisions) The Government submitted that the applicants had failed to inform the Court of the fact that the final judgments in their favour
Source officielleCASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG
ECLI:CEDH:001-116752
21 janvier 2013
21 janvier 2013
They allowed him no small favours which were common in the Wrocław Remand Centre such as allowing prisoners from different cells to meet for coffee or extending family visits.
Source officielleCASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITY;ENG
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2007:0703DEC000429905
3 juillet 2007
3 juillet 2007
European Court of Human Rights, declare that the Government of Ukraine offer to pay Ms Antonina Ivanovna ZAVALYPICH the debt still owed under the judgment of 20 February 2001 given in favour
Source officiellePRESS;CHAMBERJUDGMENTS;ENG
ECLI:CEDH:003-2755853-3014787
4 juin 2009
4 juin 2009
The Vienna Regional Criminal Court ruled in their favour by judgment of 15 June 2004 and ordered the applicant company to pay EUR 5,000 compensation to Mr Klestil, and EUR 7,000 to Mrs Klestil-Löffler
Source officielleCASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITYCOM;ENG
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2025:0121DEC003414620
21 janvier 2025
21 janvier 2025
application concerns the alleged infringement of the principle of legal certainty resulting from the quashing of an enforcement order and the de facto annulment of a final judgment made in the applicant’s favour
Source officielle2ème Chambre
651fa553c601f0831899170e
3 octobre 2023
3 octobre 2023
représentant légal en exercice, domicilié en cette qualité audit siège, prise en sa qualité d'assureur de Monsieur [P] et de la Société MAC INGENIERIE [Adresse 54] [Localité 50] Représentée par Me Laurent FAVET
Source officiellechambre 1-4
69cf0334cdc6046d47eb71dc
15 janvier 2025
15 janvier 2025
Avocat (RPJ091408) (Paris) et comparant par la SEP ORTOLLAND Avocat (R231) ET : SA D'EXPLOITATION ET DE GESTION IMMOBILIERES société anonyme de droit suisse, dont le siège social est Boulevard Georges-Favon
Source officielleCASELAW;JUDGMENTS;CHAMBER;ENG
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2007:0412JUD007673601
12 avril 2007
12 avril 2007
The applicant alleged, in particular, a violation of Article 6 of the Convention and Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 in that the judgment in his favour had not been enforced in good time. 4.
Source officielleTribunal Administratif de Grenoble
DTA_2301893_20230703
3 juillet 2023
3 juillet 2023
Par un mémoire en défense enregistré le 1er juin 2023, la société Sogrebat représentée par Me Favet ne s'oppose pas à la mesure d'expertise sous les protestations et réserves d'usage et demande que la
Source officielleCASELAW;CLIN;ENG
ECLI:CEDH:002-10632
12 mai 2015
12 mai 2015
However, although the judgment in the applicants’ favour had become legally binding, under the domestic law the municipality could lodge a cassation appeal with the Presidium of the Regional Court.
Source officiellePRESS;GENERAL;ENG
ECLI:CEDH:003-1322351-1379791
19 avril 2005
19 avril 2005
The applicants complained of the State authorities’ failure to enforce the judgments in their favour.
Source officielleCASELAW;CLIN;ENG
ECLI:CEDH:002-10996
5 avril 2016
5 avril 2016
In the instant case, final and enforceable judgments in the applicants’ favour were quashed by way of supervisory review at the defendants’ requests under the provisions of the Code of Civil Procedure
Source officiellePage 96 sur 606