Rechtsprechung
| EGMR, 13.01.2004 - 62963/00 |
Zitiervorschläge
Tipp: Um den Kurzlink (hier: https://dejure.org/2004,42850) schnell in die Zwischenablage zu kopieren, können Sie die Tastenkombination Alt + R verwenden - auch ohne diesen Bereich zu öffnen.
Volltextveröffentlichung
- Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte
JUNNILA v. FINLAND
Art. 6 MRK
Inadmissible (englisch)
Wird zitiert von ... Neu Zitiert selbst (4)
- EGMR, 21.02.1990 - 11855/85
H?KANSSON AND STURESSON v. SWEDEN
Auszug aus EGMR, 13.01.2004 - 62963/00
A waiver can be done explicitly or tacitly, in the latter case for example by refraining from submitting or maintaining a request for a hearing (see, among other authorities, Håkansson and Sturesson v. Sweden, judgment of 21 February 1990, Series A no. 171-A, p. 20, § 66; and Schuler-Zgraggen v. Switzerland, judgment of 24 June 1993, Series A no. 263, pp. 19-20, § 58). - EGMR, 24.06.1993 - 14518/89
SCHULER-ZGRAGGEN c. SUISSE
Auszug aus EGMR, 13.01.2004 - 62963/00
A waiver can be done explicitly or tacitly, in the latter case for example by refraining from submitting or maintaining a request for a hearing (see, among other authorities, Håkansson and Sturesson v. Sweden, judgment of 21 February 1990, Series A no. 171-A, p. 20, § 66; and Schuler-Zgraggen v. Switzerland, judgment of 24 June 1993, Series A no. 263, pp. 19-20, § 58). - EGMR, 26.04.1995 - 16922/90
FISCHER c. AUTRICHE
Auszug aus EGMR, 13.01.2004 - 62963/00
10-11, §§ 21-22; and Fischer v. Austria, judgment of 26 April 1995, Series A no. 312, pp. - EGMR, 23.02.1994 - 18928/91
FREDIN c. SUÈDE (N° 2)
Auszug aus EGMR, 13.01.2004 - 62963/00
Furthermore, a hearing may not be necessary due to exceptional circumstances of the case, for example when it raises no questions of fact or law which cannot be adequately resolved on the basis of the case-file and the parties" written observations (see, mutatis mutandis, Fredin v Sweden (no. 2), judgment of 23 February 1994, Series A no. 283-A, pp.
- EGMR, 11.06.2015 - 19844/08
BECKER v. AUSTRIA
Turning to the question whether this right is civil in nature, the Court observes that in the case of Junnila v. Finland it had found that, since the proceedings at issue concerned the withdrawal of the applicant's professional driving licence, which he needed to exercise his profession as a lorry driver, they involved the determination of his civil rights and it was concluded that Article 6 was applicable to the proceedings (see Junnila v. Finland (dec.), no. 62963/00, 13 January 2004).