*This article is an automatic translation of the original article, provided here for your convenience. Read the original article. Cass. crim. 25 Feb. 2015, Colas rail, No. 13-87794 Unibéton, Cemex France gestion and Cemex béton Sud-est, n° 13-87795 Colas midi méditerranée, n° 13-87796 The Criminal Division of the Court of Cassation handed down three judgments dated 25 February 2015 which ruled, apparently definitively, in favour of the compatibility of the transitional regime provided for in Article 5, IV, paragraph 2 of Order No. 2008-1161 of 13 November 2008 with Article 6, § 1 of the ECHR (Cass. crim, 25 Feb. 2015, Colas rail, No. 13-87794; Cass. crim. 25 Feb. 2015, Unibéton, Cemex France gestion and Cemex béton Sud-est, No. 13-87795; Cass. crim. 25 Feb. 2015, Colas midi méditerranée, No.
CASE COMMENTS: PROCEDURES - SEARCH AND SEIZURE OPERATIONS – TRANSITORY REGIME – ARTICLE 6 ECHR
Reasonable period : The French Supreme Court rules that an appeal lodged against inspection authorisations more than 10 to 20 years afterwards does not breach the right to a fair trial nor the reasonable period principle (Colas rail)
Access to this article is restricted to subscribers
Already Subscribed? Sign-in
Access to this article is restricted to subscribers.
Read one article for free
Sign-up to read this article for free and discover our services.