Staatkundig Gereformeerde Partij v. the Netherlands
Procedural history
The Netherlands appealed this decision to the Court of Appeal of the Hague in December 2007.
Judgment
Election Dispute Resolution Report 2020
Document contents
Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Norway, Slovenia,
Switzerland (shared with the Supreme Federal Tribunal).
66 Belgium, Denmark, Iceland, Italy, Luxembourg, the Netherlands and Norway.
- Preview
Resources
Georgian Labour Party v. Georgia
Document contents
examined the
systems of voter registration in Belgium, Denmark, Germany, Italy, the
Netherlands, Portugal, Spain and the United Kingdom.
55. With the exception of Portugal
- Preview
Resources
Incal v. Turkey
Document contents
Article 10 (see, among
other authorities, the Vereniging Weekblad Bluf! v. the Netherlands
judgment of 9 February 1995, Series A no. 306-A, p. 16, §§ 45 and
- Preview
Resources
Communist Party of Russia v. Russia
Document contents
not a court of appeal from the national courts (see
Cornelis v. the Netherlands (dec.), no. 994/03, ECHR 2004-V (extracts)),
and it is not its function
- Preview
Resources
Zdanoka v. Latvia
Document contents
Commission found that it did not. Thus, in the
cases of X v. the Netherlands (no. 6573/74, Commission decision of
19 December 1974, DR 1, p. 87) and
- Preview
Resources
Tanase v. Moldova
Document contents
Greece, Lithuania and
Poland) and six (Austria, Estonia, Germany, Latvia, the Netherlands and
Spain) allow it in certain circumstances, to varying extents. Two States
- Preview
Resources
Guide to Article 3 of Protocol No. 1 to the European Convention on Human Rights
Document contents
alleviating the bloody conflict.
39. The case of Sevinger and Eman v. the Netherlands (dec.), 2007, concerned the inability of the
residents of the island of
- Preview
Resources
Human Rights in the Administration of Justice: A Manual on Human Rights for Judges, Prosecutors, and Lawyers
Document contents
the Netherlands, judgment of 26 August 1997, Reports 1997-IV, p. 1379 ff.
81 Eur. Court HR, Case of de Haan v. the Netherlands, judgment
- Preview
Resources
Yumak & Sadak v. Turkey
Document contents
the centrist and
Christian parties in Scandinavia, the Greens in the Netherlands and the
centre-left and the right in Italy. In most countries which had
- Preview
Resources
Sitaropoulos v. Greece
Document contents
Latvia, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, the Republic of Moldova,
Monaco, the Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Russia,
Serbia, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden
- Preview
Resources
Chester v. Secretary of State for Justice
Document contents
Parliamentary elections upon Dutch nationals residing in the
Netherlands or abroad except in Aruba and the Netherlands Antilles. After
repeating (para 45) that “in the
Judgment
Bush v. Gore
Document contents
for State Prisoners, 76 Harv. L. Rev. 441, 509
(1963)); see O’Dell v. Netherland, 521 U. S. 151, 156 (1997)
(“[T]he Teague doctrine validates reasonable,
Judgment
International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights
Document contents
MARRUECOS:
FOR NEPAL:
POUR LE N PAL:
3a Henaji:
POR NEPAL:
FOR THE NETHERLANDS :
POUR LES PAYS-BAS:
3a
POR LOS PA!SES BAJOS:
D. G. E. MlDDELBURG
- Preview
Resources
Obradovic v. Bosnia and Herzegovina
Document contents
in certain specific cases (see Eur. Court HR, Engel and Others v. The Netherlands,
judgement of 8 June 1976, Series A no. 22, pp. 33-36, paragraphs 80-85)
Judgment
Measuring Effective Remedies for Fraud and Administrative Malpractice
Document contents
51 ID.
52 Belgium, Bulgaria, Czech Republic, Finland, France, Germany, Italy, Netherlands, Slovenia, Spain and the United
Kingdom.
53 John Barnes, The right to
- Preview
Resources
Electoral Justice: The International IDEA Handbook
Document contents
as in the United States,
Italy, Latvia and Lithuania but not Denmark, the Netherlands, Norway and
Switzerland; or (b) subsequent judicial review of decisions by
- Preview
Resources
19 shown of 19 entities