Rechtsprechung
EGMR, 13.12.2011 - 20883/09 |
Volltextveröffentlichung
- Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte
AJDARIC v. CROATIA
Art. 6, Art. 6 Abs. 1, Art. 41 MRK
Violation of Art. 6-1 Non-pecuniary damage - award Pecuniary damage - claim dismissed (englisch)
Sonstiges (2)
- Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte (Verfahrensmitteilung)
Ajdaric v. Croatia
- Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte (Verfahrensmitteilung)
[ENG]
Verfahrensgang
- EGMR, 13.12.2011 - 20883/09
- EGMR, 10.03.2016 - 20883/09
Wird zitiert von ... (0) Neu Zitiert selbst (2)
- EGMR, 06.12.1988 - 10588/83
BARBERÀ, MESSEGUÉ AND JABARDO v. SPAIN
Auszug aus EGMR, 13.12.2011 - 20883/09
The Court has also held in cases concerning various issues under Article 6 of the Convention in connection with criminal proceedings that the burden of proof is on the prosecution and that any doubt should benefit the accused (see, mutatis mutandis, Barberà, Messegué and Jabardo v. Spain, 6 December 1988, § 77, Series A no. 146; Lavents v. Latvia, no. 58442/00, § 125, 28 November 2002; and Melich and Beck v. the Czech Republic, no. 35450/04, § 49, 24 July 2008).In such circumstances it can be said that the decisions of the national courts did not observe the basic requirement of criminal justice that the prosecution has to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt and were not in accordance with one of the fundamental principles of criminal law, namely, in dubio pro reo (see, mutatis mutandis, Barberà, Messegué and Jabardo v. Spain, 6 December 1988, § 77, Series A no. 146; Lavents v. Latvia, no. 58442/00, § 125, 28 November 2002; and Melich and Beck v. the Czech Republic, no. 35450/04, § 49, 24 July 2008).
- EGMR, 13.05.1980 - 6694/74
ARTICO c. ITALIE
Auszug aus EGMR, 13.12.2011 - 20883/09
The Court reiterates further that, in view of the principle that the Convention is intended to guarantee not rights that are theoretical or illusory but rights that are practical and effective (see Artico v. Italy, 13 May 1980, § 33, Series A no. 37), the right to a fair trial cannot be seen as effective unless the requests and observations of the parties are truly "heard", that is to say, properly examined by the tribunal (see Dulaurans v. France, no. 34553/97, § 33, 21 March 2000; Donadzé v. Georgia, no. 74644/01, §§ 32 and 35, 7 March 2006; and Dima v. Romania, no. 58472/00, § 34, 16 November 2006).