Search
Data source
EU member states
Other countries
Keywords
Tags
Displaying 7081 - 7100 of 7175
X. v. Sri Lanka
X. v. Sri Lanka CCPR/C/120/D/2256/2013 Communication number s : 2256/2013 Author: X. Type of decision: Decision on merits Session No 120 Country Sri Lanka Submission date 11 Feb 2013 Date of decision 27 Jul 2017 Comment: This document has no comment: JUTBCCPR/C/120/D/2256/2013https://juris.ohchr.org/casedetails/2344/en-US
X. v. Timor-Leste
X. v. Timor Leste CEDAW/C/69/D/88/2015 Communication number s : 088/2015 Author: X. Type of decision: Decision on merits Session No 69 Country Timor Leste Submission date 16 Feb 2015 Date of decision 26 Feb 2018 Comment: This document has no comment: JUTBCEDAW/C/69/D/88/2015https://juris.ohchr.org/casedetails/2638/en-US
X. v. Timor-Leste
X. v. Timor Leste CEDAW/C/69/D/88/2015 Communication number s : 088/2015 Author: X. Type of decision: Decision on merits Session No 69 Country Timor Leste Submission date Date of decision 26 Feb 2018 Comment: This document has no comment: Substantive JUTBCEDAW/C/69/D/88/2015https://juris.ohchr.org/casedetails/2428/en-US
X v. United Republic of Tanzania
X v. United Republic of Tanzania CRPD/C/18/D/22/2014 Communication number s : 022/2014 Author: X Type of decision: Decision on merits Session No 20 Country United Republic of Tanzania Submission date 23 Jun 2014 Date of decision 18 Aug 2017 Comment: JUTBCRPD/C/18/D/22/2014https://juris.ohchr.org/casedetails/2390/en-US
XERO FLOR W POLSCE SP. Z O.O. v. Poland
XERO FLOR W POLSCE SP. Z O.O. v. Poland POL 07/08/2021 00:00:00 04/10/2021 09:59:18 Case Description: The case concerns the breach of the applicant company s right to a tribunal established by law due to the participation of judge M.M. in the EXEChttps://hudoc.exec.coe.int/eng?i=004-58569
Y.B. and N.S. v. Belgium
Y.B. and N.S. v. Belgium CRC/C/79/D/12/2017 Communication number s : 012/2017 Author: Y.B. and N.S. Type of decision: Decision on merits Session No 79 Country Belgium Submission date 22 Mar 2017 Date of decision 27 Sep 2018 Comment: This document has no JUTBCRC/C/79/D/12/2017https://juris.ohchr.org/casedetails/2421/en-US
Y.B. v. Russian Federation
Y.B. v. Russian Federation CCPR/C/110/D/1983/2010 Communication number s : 1983/2010 Author: Y.B. Type of decision: Inadmissibility decision Session No 110 Country Russian Federation Submission date 06 Apr 2010 Date of decision 25 Mar 2014 Comment: This JUTBCCPR/C/110/D/1983/2010https://juris.ohchr.org/casedetails/1813/en-US
Y.C. v. Denmark
Y.C. v. Denmark CEDAW/C/59/D/59/2013 Communication number s : 059/2013 Author: Y.C. represented by counsel City Advokaterne Type of decision: Inadmissibility decision Session No 59 Country Denmark Submission date 16 Jan 2013 Date of decision 24 Oct 2014 JUTBCEDAW/C/59/D/59/2013https://juris.ohchr.org/casedetails/1882/en-US
Y. M. v. Russian Federation
Y. M. v. Russian Federation CCPR/C/104/D/1858/2009 Communication number s : 1858/2009 Author: Y. M. Type of decision: Inadmissibility decision Session No 104 Country Russian Federation Submission date 20 Oct 2007 Date of decision 26 Mar 2012 Comment: This JUTBCCPR/C/104/D/1858/2009https://juris.ohchr.org/casedetails/1453/en-US
Y.M. v. Spain
Y.M. v. Spain CRC/C/78/D/8/2016 Communication number s : 008/2016 Author: Y.M. Type of decision: Inadmissibility decision Session No 78 Country Spain Submission date 16 Dec 2016 Date of decision 31 May 2018 Comment: This document has no comment: JUTBCRC/C/78/D/8/2016https://juris.ohchr.org/casedetails/2396/en-US
Y. Sh. v. Russian Federation
Y. Sh. v. Russian Federation CCPR/C/128/D/2815/2016 Communication number s : 2815/2016 Author: Y. Sh. Type of decision: Inadmissibility decision Session No 128 Country Russian Federation Submission date 15 Apr 2016 Date of decision 13 Mar 2020 Comment: JUTBCCPR/C/128/D/2815/2016https://juris.ohchr.org/casedetails/2868/en-US
Y v. Australia
Y v. Australia CCPR/C/69/D/772/1997 Communication number s : 772/1997 Author: Colin Mc Donald and Nicholas Poynder Type of decision: Inadmissibility decision Session No 69 Country Australia Submission date 25 Oct 1996 Date of decision 17 Jul 2000 Comment: JUTBCCPR/C/69/D/772/1997https://juris.ohchr.org/casedetails/883/en-US
Y. v. Canada,Sri Lanka
Y. v. Canada Sri Lanka CCPR/C/114/D/2280/2013 Communication number s : 2280/2013 Author: Y. Type of decision: Decision on merits Session No 114 Country Canada Sri Lanka Submission date 29 Jul 2013 Date of decision 22 Jul 2015 Comment: This document has no JUTBCCPR/C/114/D/2280/2013https://juris.ohchr.org/casedetails/1995/en-US
Y v. Denmark
Y v. Denmark CCPR/C/136/D/2774/2016 Communication number s : 2774/2016 Author: Y Type of decision: Inadmissibility decision Session No 136 Country Denmark Submission date 28 Aug 2015 Date of decision 04 Nov 2022 Comment: This document has no comment: JUTBCCPR/C/136/D/2774/2016https://juris.ohchr.org/casedetails/3493/en-US
Y v. United Republic of Tanzania
Y v. United Republic of Tanzania CRPD/C/20/D/23/2014 Communication number s : 023/2014 Author: Y Type of decision: Decision on merits Session No 20 Country United Republic of Tanzania Submission date 23 Jun 2014 Date of decision 31 Aug 2018 Comment: This JUTBCRPD/C/20/D/23/2014https://juris.ohchr.org/casedetails/2511/en-US
YEMEN: CONCLUDING OBSERVATIONS
YEMEN: CONCLUDING OBSERVATIONS E/C.12/YEM/CO/3 NULL 2023 03 13T00:00:00 CESCR United Nations E/C.12/YEM/CO/3 Economic and Social Council Distr.: General 23 March 2023 Original: English Committee on Economic Social and Cultural Rights Concluding UHRIE/C.12/YEM/CO/3https://uhri.ohchr.org/en/document/7107bb20-0509-4a23-bfe4-02e5a99e8e2b
YETIS AND OTHERS v. Turkey
YETIS AND OTHERS v. Turkey TUR 06/10/2010 00:00:00 10/11/2016 16:04:14 Case Description: Protection of property: Disproportionate interference on account of failure to pay the difference between the value of the compensation for the expropriation on the EXEChttps://hudoc.exec.coe.int/eng?i=004-37288
YORDANOVA AND OTHERS v. Bulgaria
YORDANOVA AND OTHERS v. Bulgaria BGR 19/07/2018 00:00:00 24/09/2018 18:23:43 Case Description: Protection of property: Disproportionate interference due to the authorities refusal to provide compensation in the form of company shares for property EXEChttps://hudoc.exec.coe.int/eng?i=004-50293
YUKSELLER LTD. STI. v. Turkey
YUKSELLER LTD. STI. v. Turkey TUR 19/01/2021 00:00:00 15/03/2021 16:05:41 Case Description: Protection of property rights: Disproportionate interference due to the applicant s de facto expropriation without adequate compensation and domestic courts EXEChttps://hudoc.exec.coe.int/eng?i=004-56857
YURIY LOBANOV v. Russia
YURIY LOBANOV v. Russia RUS 11/04/2011 00:00:00 04/11/2016 11:41:33 Case Description: Protection of property: Authorities failure to set up a legislative or regulatory procedure for the implementation of the applicants right to redemption of the State EXEChttps://hudoc.exec.coe.int/eng?i=004-13751