{"version":"1.0","provider_name":"Ma\u00eetre Hassan Kohen, avocat en droit p\u00e9nal \u00e0 Paris","provider_url":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/ru\/","author_name":"Ma\u00eetre Hassan Kohen, avocat en droit p\u00e9nal \u00e0 Paris","author_url":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/ru\/","title":"ECLI:NL:HR:2026:554 Hoge Raad , 07-04-2026 \/ 23\/04074","type":"rich","width":600,"height":338,"html":"<blockquote class=\"wp-embedded-content\" data-secret=\"0udXksethu\"><a href=\"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/ru\/jurisprudences\/eclinlhr2026554-hoge-raad-07-04-2026-23-04074\/\">ECLI:NL:HR:2026:554 Hoge Raad , 07-04-2026 \/ 23\/04074<\/a><\/blockquote><iframe sandbox=\"allow-scripts\" security=\"restricted\" src=\"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/ru\/jurisprudences\/eclinlhr2026554-hoge-raad-07-04-2026-23-04074\/embed\/#?secret=0udXksethu\" width=\"600\" height=\"338\" title=\"\u00abECLI:NL:HR:2026:554 Hoge Raad , 07-04-2026 \/ 23\/04074\u00bb &#8212; Ma\u00eetre Hassan Kohen, avocat en droit p\u00e9nal \u00e0 Paris\" data-secret=\"0udXksethu\" frameborder=\"0\" marginwidth=\"0\" marginheight=\"0\" scrolling=\"no\" class=\"wp-embedded-content\"><\/iframe><script>\n\/*! This file is auto-generated *\/\n!function(d,l){\"use strict\";l.querySelector&&d.addEventListener&&\"undefined\"!=typeof URL&&(d.wp=d.wp||{},d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage||(d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage=function(e){var t=e.data;if((t||t.secret||t.message||t.value)&&!\/[^a-zA-Z0-9]\/.test(t.secret)){for(var s,r,n,a=l.querySelectorAll('iframe[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),o=l.querySelectorAll('blockquote[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),c=new RegExp(\"^https?:$\",\"i\"),i=0;i<o.length;i++)o[i].style.display=\"none\";for(i=0;i<a.length;i++)s=a[i],e.source===s.contentWindow&&(s.removeAttribute(\"style\"),\"height\"===t.message?(1e3<(r=parseInt(t.value,10))?r=1e3:~~r<200&&(r=200),s.height=r):\"link\"===t.message&&(r=new URL(s.getAttribute(\"src\")),n=new URL(t.value),c.test(n.protocol))&&n.host===r.host&&l.activeElement===s&&(d.top.location.href=t.value))}},d.addEventListener(\"message\",d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage,!1),l.addEventListener(\"DOMContentLoaded\",function(){for(var e,t,s=l.querySelectorAll(\"iframe.wp-embedded-content\"),r=0;r<s.length;r++)(t=(e=s[r]).getAttribute(\"data-secret\"))||(t=Math.random().toString(36).substring(2,12),e.src+=\"#?secret=\"+t,e.setAttribute(\"data-secret\",t)),e.contentWindow.postMessage({message:\"ready\",secret:t},\"*\")},!1)))}(window,document);\n\/\/# sourceURL=https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/wp-includes\/js\/wp-embed.min.js\n<\/script>\n","description":"Weigering bloedonderzoek, art. 163.6 WVWW 1994. 1. Bewijsklacht \u201cbevel\u201d. Is sprake van \u201cbevel\u201d tot medewerking aan bloedonderzoek a.b.i. art. 163.5 WVW 1994, nu p-v van bevindingen m.b.t. rijden onder invloed inhoudt dat hulp OvJ medewerking daaraan heeft \u201cgevorderd\u201d? 2. Afwijzing van ttz. in hoger beroep voorwaardelijk gedaan verzoek tot horen van hulp OvJ als getuige, o.g.v. noodzaakcriterium..."}