Browsing history:

↳
CASE OF IOANNOU v. TURKEYDISSENTING OPINION OF JUDGE KARAKA Åž
CASE OF SASITA ISRAILOVA AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA
CASE OF ALLENET DE RIBEMONT v. FRANCE (INTERPRETATION)
CASES OF SANTA CRUZ RUIZ AND CUSCANI AGAINST THE UNITED KINGDOM
CASE OF PİŞKİN v. TURKEYPARTLY DISSENTING OPINION OF JUDGE Y Ü KSEL
CASE OF BRANTOM INTERNATIONAL S.R.L. AND OTHERS v. THE REPUBLIC OF MOLDOVA
78/1041/EEC: Council Decision of 21 December 1978 amending Decision 71/143/EEC setting up machinery for medium-term financial assistance
CASE OF BIZIUK AGAINST POLAND (No. 2)
Commission Regulation (EEC) No 2983/90 of 15 October 1990 concerning the allocation of the quantities of the import quota for meat of bovine animals, forzen opened by Regulation (EEC) No 3889/89 for which import licence applications have not been lodged
CASE OF OYAL v. TURKEYPARTLY CONCURRING AND PARTLY DISSENTING OPINION OF JUDGE SAJÓ

Document text Analytics

CASE OF ARCELORMITTAL AMBALAJ CELIGI SANAYI VE TICARET ANONIM SIRKETI v. UKRAINE

Doc ref: 23819/11 • ECHR ID: 001-211032

Document date: July 15, 2021

Inbound citations: 1
•
Cited paragraphs: 0
•
Outbound citations: 10

At a glance

Citations by paragraph

Historical distribution of citations

Detailed analytics

Inbound citations

u unique documents citing • g citations total to 5 paragraphs

Outbound citations

Z unique documents cited • 8Z citations total

© European Union, https://eur-lex.europa.eu, 1998 - 2026

Active Products: EUCJ + ECHR Data Package + Citation Analytics • Documents in DB: 401132 • Paragraphs parsed: 45279850 • Citations processed 3468846