Skip to content

Recent Posts

  • Despagubire victima accident rutier
  • Sanctiunile aplicabile in starea de alerta
  • Contestatia impotriva proceselor verbale emise pentru incalcarea ordonantelor militare
  • Infractiunile savirsite in timpul starii de urgenta. Pedepse aplicabile
  • Pandemia si contractele de inchiriere

Most Used Categories

  • Gandurile si sfaturile unui avocat (108)
  • Experienta si practica unui avocat (42)
  • Despre Noi (10)
Skip to content

Cabinet de Avocatura Costache Ovidiu Mihai Blog

Cabinet de Avocatura Costache Ovidiu Mihai

Subscribe
  • Contact
  • Subscribe
  • Home
  • Experienta si practica unui avocat
  • In atentia “procesomanilor” care prefera CEDO

In atentia “procesomanilor” care prefera CEDO

Costache MihaiNovember 16, 2011

Pe data de 15 noiembrie 2011, CEDO a pronunţat Decizia de inadmisibilitate în cazul (cazurile) Petrović v. Serbia.

Precum reiese din Decizie, dl Petrović a stabilit recordul de cereri cu conţinut dubios adresate CEDO, de peste 400 de aplicaţii, inclusiv în numele unor persoane decedate înaintea redactării procurii de reprezentare CEDO.

Postez continutul decizie in engleza deoarece traducerea poate reduce din expresivitatea continutului sau.

“Moreover, he has applied the same practice in more than 400 cases that he has lodged before the Court against Serbia, Croatia, Slovenia, Montenegro, Bosnia and Herzegovina, as well as the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia. In addition, he has brought before the Court more than 100 cases on behalf of other applicants as their lawyer.

In the course of the examination of the cases, it became evident that on at least three occasions Mr Petrović had submitted applications on behalf of people who had died, with the power of attorney signed on behalf of at least one of them after his death. In a number of other cases, the Court had doubts as to the authenticity of the powers of
attorney that Mr Petrović supplied with the applications. 

In March 2010 the President of the Second Section of the Court decided to ban Mr Petrović from representing applicants before the Court, at that time and in the future. Despite being informed of the ban, Mr Petrović continued acting on behalf of the applicants, sometimes as their attorney and sometimes only by preparing their submissions for the Court. Each time he requested reimbursement of his fees, even though he was well aware that the Court would not take into consideration such requests.”

CEDO, decizie

Post navigation

Previous: Taxa poluare – recurs in interesul legii pronuntat de ICCJ
Next: Suspendare permis conducere- admiterea prezumtiei de validitate a procesului verbal –

Related Posts

Atunci când se instituie măsuri asigurătorii în procesul penal, nu este necesar să se indice sau să se dovedească ori să se individualizeze bunurile asupra cărora se înființează măsura asigurătorie

October 20, 2017 Costache Mihai

Curtea de Conturi, Casa Asigurari Sanatate Ilfov, ANAF-ul sau incompetenta statului

October 13, 2017October 13, 2017 Costache Mihai

Consecintele dezincrimarii evaziunii fiscale prevazute de art 6 din legea 241/2005

May 11, 2015 Costache Mihai

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Articole adaugate recent

  • Despagubire victima accident rutier
  • Sanctiunile aplicabile in starea de alerta
  • Contestatia impotriva proceselor verbale emise pentru incalcarea ordonantelor militare
  • Infractiunile savirsite in timpul starii de urgenta. Pedepse aplicabile
  • Pandemia si contractele de inchiriere

Categories

  • Despre Noi (10)
  • Experienta si practica unui avocat (42)
  • Gandurile si sfaturile unui avocat (108)

Vizitati-ne si pe

  • Cabinet de Avocatura
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • vCard

Urmaresc si

  • Green Walls – Pereti Vegetali – Gradini Verticale

Archives

  • August 2020 (1)
  • May 2020 (2)
  • April 2020 (3)
  • January 2020 (2)
  • November 2017 (1)
  • October 2017 (3)
  • May 2017 (1)
  • March 2016 (1)
  • May 2015 (2)
  • March 2015 (2)
  • November 2014 (1)
  • January 2014 (1)
  • August 2013 (1)
  • April 2013 (1)
  • February 2013 (3)
  • January 2013 (1)
  • December 2012 (2)
  • November 2012 (1)
  • October 2012 (3)
  • September 2012 (2)
  • August 2012 (3)
  • July 2012 (3)
  • June 2012 (1)
  • May 2012 (3)
  • April 2012 (5)
  • March 2012 (6)
  • February 2012 (5)
  • January 2012 (2)
  • December 2011 (5)
  • November 2011 (8)
  • October 2011 (4)
  • September 2011 (6)
  • August 2011 (3)
  • July 2011 (5)
  • June 2011 (6)
  • May 2011 (9)
  • April 2011 (4)
  • March 2011 (7)
  • February 2011 (4)
  • January 2011 (7)
  • December 2010 (4)
  • November 2010 (10)
  • October 2010 (10)
  • September 2010 (6)

toateblogurile.ro

toateBlogurile.ro

Comentarii recente

  • Talnaci Andreea on A fi avocatul apararii
  • Costache Mihai on Parasirea locului accidentului.
  • Costache Mihai on Tergiversarea urmaririi penale de catre procuror. Cale de atac
  • Costache Mihai on Tergiversarea urmaririi penale de catre procuror. Cale de atac
  • Ion Mezei on Tergiversarea urmaririi penale de catre procuror. Cale de atac
Copyright All Rights Reserved | Theme: BlockWP by Candid Themes.