X and Others v Austria - définition. Qu'est-ce que X and Others v Austria
Diclib.com
Dictionnaire ChatGPT
Entrez un mot ou une phrase dans n'importe quelle langue 👆
Langue:

Traduction et analyse de mots par intelligence artificielle ChatGPT

Sur cette page, vous pouvez obtenir une analyse détaillée d'un mot ou d'une phrase, réalisée à l'aide de la meilleure technologie d'intelligence artificielle à ce jour:

  • comment le mot est utilisé
  • fréquence d'utilisation
  • il est utilisé plus souvent dans le discours oral ou écrit
  • options de traduction de mots
  • exemples d'utilisation (plusieurs phrases avec traduction)
  • étymologie

Qu'est-ce (qui) est X and Others v Austria - définition

2003 EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS CASE
S L v. Austria; S.L. v. Austria; SL v. Austria

X and Others v. Austria         
EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS CASE CONCERNING SAME-SEX ADOPTION
X and Others v Austria
X and Others v. Austria 53 ILM 64 was a human rights case that was decided in 2013 by the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR).
Schalk and Kopf v Austria         
Schalk and Kopf vs. Austria; Schalk and Kopf v. Austria
Schalk and Kopf v Austria (Application no. 30141/04) is a case decided in 2010 by the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) in which it was clarified that the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) does not oblige member states to legislate for or legally recognize same-sex marriages.
X v Bedfordshire CC         
UK LEGAL CASE
X and others (minors) v Bedfordshire County Council
X and others (minors) v Bedfordshire County Council [1995] 3 All ER 353 was a series of five linked appeals which reached the House of Lords in 1995. The case is an important authority relating to Administrative liability in English Law.

Wikipédia

S. L. v. Austria

S.L. v. Austria was a case in the European Court of Human Rights concerning the age of consent. Austrian law, under Article 209 of the Austrian Criminal Code, provided for higher age of consent for male homosexual relations than for other (heterosexual or female homosexual) relations. The judgment of the court was delivered on 9 January 2003.