Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  CEREALE FLOR S.A. AND ROSCA v. THE REPUBLIC OF MOLDOVA

  Violation of Article 6 - Right to a fair trial (Article 6 - Civil proceedings;Article 6-1 - Fair hearing);Violation of Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 - Protection of property (Article 1 para. 1 of Protocol No. 1 - Peaceful enjoyment of possessions) ...

Wird zitiert von ...Neu Zitiert selbst (3)

• EGMR, 14.11.2006 - 6923/03

  MELNIC v. MOLDOVA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 14.02.2017 - 24042/09

  Such a decision will, however, depend on the particular circumstances of whether the unilateral declaration offers a sufficient basis for finding that respect for human rights as defined in the Convention does not require the Court to continue its examination of the case (see Tahsin Acar v. Turkey (preliminary issue) [GC], no. 26307/95, § 75, ECHR 2003-VI, Melnic v. Moldova, no. 6923/03, § 22, 14 November 2006, and Jeronovics v. Latvia [GC], no. 44898/10, § 64, ECHR 2016).

  The Court has frequently found violations of Article 6 § 1 of the Convention in cases raising issues similar to those in the present application (see Popov (no.2), cited above, §§ 52-58, 6 December 2005; Oferta Plus SRL v. Moldova, no. 14385/04, §§ 104-07 and 112-15, 19 December 2006; Melnic v. Moldova, no. 6923/03, §§ 38-44, 14 November 2006; and Istrate v. Moldova, no. 53773/00, §§ 46-61, 13 June 2006).

• EGMR, 07.06.2012 - 38433/09

  CENTRO EUROPA 7 S.R.L. AND DI STEFANO v. ITALY

  Auszug aus EGMR, 14.02.2017 - 24042/09

  Aspects that may be taken into account include the company's reputation, uncertainty in planning, disruption in the management of the company (for which there is no precise method of calculating the consequences) and lastly, albeit to a lesser degree, the anxiety and inconvenience caused to the members of the management team (see Comingersoll S.A. v. Portugal [GC], no. 35382/97, § 35, ECHR 2000-IV, and Centro Europa 7 S.r.l. and Di Stefano v. Italy [GC], no. 38433/09, § 221, ECHR 2012).
• EGMR, 06.04.2000 - 35382/97

  COMINGERSOLL S.A. v. PORTUGAL

  Auszug aus EGMR, 14.02.2017 - 24042/09

  Aspects that may be taken into account include the company's reputation, uncertainty in planning, disruption in the management of the company (for which there is no precise method of calculating the consequences) and lastly, albeit to a lesser degree, the anxiety and inconvenience caused to the members of the management team (see Comingersoll S.A. v. Portugal [GC], no. 35382/97, § 35, ECHR 2000-IV, and Centro Europa 7 S.r.l. and Di Stefano v. Italy [GC], no. 38433/09, § 221, ECHR 2012).

• EGMR, 28.05.2019 - 27773/05

  CONSOCIVIL S.A. ET ZELINSCHI c. RÉPUBLIQUE DE MOLDOVA

  En ce qui concerne le préjudice matériel que la société requérante dit avoir subi à la suite de l'annulation de la décision de substitution et du titre exécutoire, la Cour relève que le titre exécutoire n'a pas été exécuté et l'article 449 h) du code de procédure civile permet la révision d'un procès sur le plan interne lorsqu'elle-même a constaté la violation de droits et libertés fondamentaux d'un requérant (Cereale Flor S.A. et Rosca c. République de Moldova, nos 24042/09 et 3159/10, § 54, 14 février 2017).