Browsing history:

↳
CASE OF SÖDERMAN v. SWEDENDISSENTING OPINION OF JUDGE KALAYDJIEVA
Commission Regulation (EEC) No 291/92 of 6 February 1992 amending Regulation (EEC) No 1730/87 laying down quality standards for table grapes
CASE OF KARASTELEV AND OTHERS v. RUSSIACONCURRING OPINION OF JUDGE LEMMENS
Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber), 15 November 2012. Bericap Záródástechnikai Bt. v Plastinnova 2000 Kft.
Commission Regulation (EEC) No 97/82 of 18 January 1982 fixing the sluice-gate prices and levies for pigmeat
Judgment of the General Court (Fourth Chamber) of 7 September 2022. WT v European Commission.
Commission Regulation (EEC) No 2345/86 of 25 July 1986 amending Regulation (EEC) No 1726/82 determining intervention centres for colza, rape and sunflower seed
Commission Regulation (EEC) No 419/92 of 20 February 1992 fixing the corrective amount applicable to the refund on cereals
CASE OF BUCIAŞ v. ROMANIADISSENTING OPINION OF JUDGE Å IKUTA
CASE OF ZINATULLIN v. RUSSIACONCURRING OPINION OF JUDGE DEDOV

Document text Analytics

CASE OF TUDOR-AUTO SRL AND TRIPLU-TUDOR SRL v. THE REPUBLIC OF MOLDOVA

Doc ref: 36341/03;36344/03;30346/05 • ECHR ID: 001-160413

Document date: February 9, 2016

Inbound citations: 7
•
Cited paragraphs: 1
•
Outbound citations: 8

At a glance

Citations by paragraph

Historical distribution of citations

Detailed analytics

Inbound citations

R unique documents citing • n citations total to h paragraphs

Outbound citations

m unique documents cited • L 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