Rechtsprechung
| EGMR, 17.07.2007 - 61557/00 |
Zitiervorschläge
Tipp: Um den Kurzlink (hier: https://dejure.org/2007,50566) schnell in die Zwischenablage zu kopieren, können Sie die Tastenkombination Alt + R verwenden - auch ohne diesen Bereich zu öffnen.
Volltextveröffentlichung
- Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte
ANDRIA OY AND KARI KARANKO v. FINLAND
Art. 6 MRK
No violation of Art. 6 (englisch)
Verfahrensgang
- EGMR, 27.04.2004 - 61557/00
- EGMR, 13.03.2007 - 61557/00
- EGMR, 17.07.2007 - 61557/00
Wird zitiert von ... (0) Neu Zitiert selbst (5)
- EGMR, 07.02.2002 - 53176/99
MIKULIC v. CROATIA
Auszug aus EGMR, 17.07.2007 - 61557/00
Thus the applicants" case did not belong to a category that by its nature calls for special expedition (such as custody of children (see Hokkanen v. Finland, judgment of 23 September 1994, Series A no. 299-A, § 72), civil status and capacity (see Mikulic v. Croatia, no. 53176/99, § 44, ECHR 2002-I) or labour disputes (see Frydlender, cited above, § 45, Launikari v. Finland, no. 34120/96, § 36, 5 October 2000)). - EGMR, 27.06.2000 - 30979/96
FRYDLENDER c. FRANCE
Auszug aus EGMR, 17.07.2007 - 61557/00
The Court reiterates that the reasonableness of the length of proceedings must be assessed in the light of the circumstances of the case and with reference to the following criteria: the complexity of the case, the conduct of the applicants and the relevant authorities and what was at stake for the applicants in the dispute (see, among many other authorities, Frydlender v. France [GC], no. 30979/96, § 43, ECHR 2000-VII). - EGMR, 08.12.1983 - 7984/77
PRETTO ET AUTRES c. ITALIE
Auszug aus EGMR, 17.07.2007 - 61557/00
The exercise of the right to a hearing within a reasonable time is subject, in civil cases, to diligence being shown by the parties concerned (see Pretto and Others v. Italy, judgment of 8 December 1983, Series A no. 71, pp. 14-15, § 33). - EGMR, 23.09.1994 - 19823/92
HOKKANEN v. FINLAND
Auszug aus EGMR, 17.07.2007 - 61557/00
Thus the applicants" case did not belong to a category that by its nature calls for special expedition (such as custody of children (see Hokkanen v. Finland, judgment of 23 September 1994, Series A no. 299-A, § 72), civil status and capacity (see Mikulic v. Croatia, no. 53176/99, § 44, ECHR 2002-I) or labour disputes (see Frydlender, cited above, § 45, Launikari v. Finland, no. 34120/96, § 36, 5 October 2000)). - EGMR, 05.10.2000 - 34120/96
LAUNIKARI v. FINLAND
Auszug aus EGMR, 17.07.2007 - 61557/00
Thus the applicants" case did not belong to a category that by its nature calls for special expedition (such as custody of children (see Hokkanen v. Finland, judgment of 23 September 1994, Series A no. 299-A, § 72), civil status and capacity (see Mikulic v. Croatia, no. 53176/99, § 44, ECHR 2002-I) or labour disputes (see Frydlender, cited above, § 45, Launikari v. Finland, no. 34120/96, § 36, 5 October 2000)).