Skip to content

swarb.co.uk

May the law be with you – lex vobiscum

  • Law
    • More Recent Cases
    • e-Legal Gathering
    • Case Layout
    • FAQ
    • Searching
    • Areas of Law
    • law index
    • Courts
    • Reports
    • Judges
    • Case Names
  • Privacy
    • GDPR – Overall
    • Anonymity Orders
    • GDPR – Request to be ‘Forgotten’
    • Privacy – Users
    • GDPR – Content
    • GDPR – Legitimate Interests
    • Lawfulness of processing
    • Purposes Limitation
    • Cookie Policy
    • GDPR -Accuracy
    • GDPR – Resources
    • California Consumer Privacy Act
  • About
    • What we do
    • Contact
    • Development
  • Advertising
    • Advertising
    • Donate
    • Statistics
  • Registration

Primc v Slovenia: ECHR 12 Jun 2012

1959/07 (Decision), [2012] ECHR 1148
Bailii
European Convention on Human Rights

Updated: 14 April 2021; Ref: scu.462057

Posted on April 15, 2021April 15, 2021 by dlsPosted in Human Rights

Post navigation

Previous Previous post: Brejwo v Poland: ECHR 14 Jun 2012
Next Next post: MM v Russia: ECHR 3 Jul 2012

Areas of Law:

  • Administrative (1,122)
  • Adoption (461)
  • Agency (620)
  • Agriculture (773)
  • Animals (305)
  • Arbitration (1,262)
  • Armed Forces (359)
  • Banking (1,416)
  • Benefits (3,502)
  • Capital Gains Tax (486)
  • Charity (383)
  • Child Support (309)
  • Children (5,385)
  • Civil Procedure Rules (193)
  • Commercial (1,422)
  • Commonwealth (3,082)
  • Company (3,023)
  • Constitutional (949)
  • Construction (1,169)
  • Consumer (740)
  • Contempt of Court (712)
  • Contract (6,112)
  • Coroners (421)
  • Corporation Tax (680)
  • Costs (3,546)
  • Crime (8,397)
  • Criminal Evidence (633)
  • Criminal Practice (3,313)
  • Criminal Sentencing (2,400)
  • Customs and Excise (1,686)
  • Damages (2,486)
  • Defamation (1,543)
  • Development (1)
  • Discrimination (2,626)
  • Ecclesiastical (307)
  • Education (1,063)
  • Elections (224)
  • Employment (12,719)
  • Environment (820)
  • Equity (961)
  • Estoppel (334)
  • European (12,879)
  • Evidence (517)
  • Extradition (1,589)
  • Family (2,883)
  • Financial Services (1,012)
  • Health (1,522)
  • Health and Safety (459)
  • Health Professions (1,927)
  • Housing (1,991)
  • Human Rights (19,572)
  • Immigration (56,350)
  • Income Tax (3,224)
  • Information (15,616)
  • Inheritance Tax (178)
  • Insolvency (3,043)
  • Insurance (1,249)
  • Intellectual Property (13,534)
  • International (956)
  • Ireland (18)
  • Judicial Review (584)
  • Jurisdiction (1,047)
  • Jury (858)
  • Land (5,293)
  • Landlord and Tenant (15,647)
  • Legal Aid (391)
  • Legal Professions (1,956)
  • Licensing (594)
  • Limitation (1,062)
  • Litigation Practice (7,050)
  • Local Government (1,630)
  • Magistrates (758)
  • Media (1,141)
  • Natural Justice (322)
  • Negligence (1,336)
  • News (49)
  • Northern Ireland (1,754)
  • Nuisance (460)
  • Personal Injury (2,899)
  • Planning (3,239)
  • Police (1,549)
  • Prisons (1,248)
  • Professional Negligence (1,619)
  • Rating (670)
  • Registered Land (823)
  • Road Traffic (1,211)
  • Scotland (16,740)
  • Stamp Duty (187)
  • Taxes – Other (2,256)
  • Taxes Management (1,381)
  • Torts – Other (2,756)
  • Transport (2,042)
  • Trusts (1,473)
  • Undue Influence (152)
  • Utilities (477)
  • VAT (5,534)
  • Vicarious Liability (248)
  • Wales (16)
  • Wills and Probate (1,781)

Recent Posts

  • Szymikowska and Szymikowski v Poland: ECHR 6 May 2003
  • Witczak v Poland: ECHR 6 May 2003
  • Skora v Poland: ECHR 1 Jul 2003
  • Gelsomini Sigeri Srl v Italy: ECHR 18 Dec 2003
  • Kovacs v Hungary: ECHR 16 Dec 2003
  • Zaborsky and Smarikova v Slovakia: ECHR 16 Dec 2003
  • Wohlmeyer Bau Gmbh v Austria: ECHR 8 Jul 2004
  • Serghides v Cyprus: ECHR 10 Jun 2003
  • Pisk-Piskowski v Poland: ECHR 14 Jun 2005
  • Janssen v Germany: ECHR 20 Dec 2001
  • Z R v Poland: ECHR 15 Jan 2002
  • Lanz v Austria: ECHR 31 Jan 2002
  • Surman-Januszewska v Poland: ECHR 27 Apr 2004
  • Kemmache v France (Nos 1 And 2): ECHR 27 Nov 1991
  • University of East Anglia (Decision Notice) FER0280033: ICO 23 Jun 2011
  • Mikulova v Slovakia: ECHR 6 Dec 2005
  • Nagy v Hungary: ECHR 20 Dec 2005
  • Vigovskyy v Ukraine: ECHR 20 Dec 2005
  • Relais Du Min Sarl v France: ECHR 20 Dec 2005
  • Cetin v Turkey: ECHR 20 Dec 2005
  • Ozer And Others v Turkey: ECHR 20 Dec 2005
  • Oleynik And Baybarza v Ukraine: ECHR 20 Dec 2005
  • Korkmaz v Turkey (No. 3): ECHR 20 Dec 2005
  • Majercsik v Hungary: ECHR 20 Dec 2005
  • Bezugly v Ukraine: ECHR 20 Dec 2005
  • Pereira v Portugal: ECHR 20 Dec 2005
  • Tusashvili v Russia: ECHR 15 Dec 2005
  • Zaugolnova v Russia: ECHR 15 Dec 2005
  • Mlynar v The Czech Republic: ECHR 13 Dec 2005
  • Di Cola v Italy: ECHR 15 Dec 2005
  • Piskunov v Ukraine: ECHR 13 Dec 2005
  • Rybakov v Russia: ECHR 22 Dec 2005
  • Drozdowski v Poland: ECHR 6 Dec 2005
  • Georgiev v Bulgaria: ECHR 15 Dec 2005
  • Ruoho v Finland: ECHR 13 Dec 2005
  • Anglo-Dutch Petroleum International Inc and Another v Ramco Energy Plc& Anor: SCS 6 Dec 2005
  • Wisse v France: ECHR 20 Dec 2005
  • Jasinski v Poland: ECHR 20 Dec 2005
  • Henry v British Broadcasting Corporation: QBD 2 Dec 2005
  • Bank of Credit and Commerce International Sa and Another v Saadi and Another: QBD 12 Oct 2005
  • AbouRahmah and Another v Abacha and others: QBD 28 Nov 2005
  • Wilson v Wychavon District Council and Another: Admn 20 Dec 2005
  • Pugh, Re Application for the Setting of A Minimum Term: QBD 28 Nov 2005
  • Karadzic v Croatia: ECHR 15 Dec 2005
  • Vanyan v Russia: ECHR 15 Dec 2005
  • Barry v Ireland: ECHR 15 Dec 2005
  • A v XB (Non-Party): QBD 25 Mar 2004
  • Aberdeen Journals Limited v Office of Fair Trading (No 2): CAT 2002
  • Kumar Ali v The State (Appeal 56 of 2004) and Leslie Tiwari v The State: PC 2 Nov 2005
  • Kwasi Bekoe v Horace Broomes: PC 31 Oct 2005

Meta

  • Log in
  • Entries feed
  • Comments feed
  • WordPress.org
swarb.co.uk is published by David Swarbrick of 10 Halifax Road, Brighouse West Yorkshire HD6 2AG. Tel: 0795 457 9992, 01484 380326 or email at david@swarb.co.uk

IMPORTANT:This site reports and summarizes cases. We do not provide advice. Before making any decision, you must read the full case report and take professional advice as appropriate. Only full case reports are accepted in court.

Proudly powered by WordPress Theme: Colinear by Automattic.