Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  BAKOYANNI v. GREECE

  Preliminary objection joined to merits and dismissed (Art. 34) Individual applications;(Art. 34) Victim;Preliminary objection joined to merits and dismissed (Art. 35) Admissibility criteria;(Art. 35-1) Exhaustion of domestic remedies;Preliminary objection joined to ...

Sonstiges

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte (Verfahrensmitteilung)

  BAKOYANNI c. GRÈCE

  Art. 1, Art. 6 Abs. 1 MRK
  [FRE]

Wird zitiert von ... (0)Neu Zitiert selbst (9)

• EGMR, 12.02.2004 - 47287/99

  PEREZ c. FRANCE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 20.12.2022 - 31012/19

  The possibility to have third parties prosecuted or sentenced for a criminal offence cannot be asserted independently: it must be indissociable from the victim's exercise of a right to bring civil proceedings in domestic law, even if only to secure symbolic reparation or to protect a civil right such as the right to a "good reputation" (Perez v. France [GC], no. 47287/99, § 70, ECHR 2004-I).
• EGMR, 23.10.2012 - 10601/09

  IRENE WILSON v. THE UNITED KINGDOM

  Auszug aus EGMR, 20.12.2022 - 31012/19

  The Court recalls that the Convention does not guarantee the right to institute criminal proceedings or secure the conviction of a third party (Irene Wilson v. The United Kingdom (dec.), no. 10601/09, § 29, 23 October 2012, and M.T. and S.T. v. Slovakia (dec.), no. 59968/09, § 83, 29 May 2012, with further references therein).
• EGMR, 29.05.2012 - 59968/09

  M.T. AND S.T. v. SLOVAKIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 20.12.2022 - 31012/19

  The Court recalls that the Convention does not guarantee the right to institute criminal proceedings or secure the conviction of a third party (Irene Wilson v. The United Kingdom (dec.), no. 10601/09, § 29, 23 October 2012, and M.T. and S.T. v. Slovakia (dec.), no. 59968/09, § 83, 29 May 2012, with further references therein).

 
• EGMR, 21.02.1975 - 4451/70

  GOLDER c. ROYAUME-UNI

  Auszug aus EGMR, 20.12.2022 - 31012/19

  The right of access to a court guaranteed by Article 6 was established in Golder v. the United Kingdom (21 February 1975, §§ 28-36, Series A no. 18).
• EGMR, 17.01.2012 - 36760/06

  STANEV c. BULGARIE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 20.12.2022 - 31012/19

  However, that right is not absolute and may be subject to limitations; these are permitted by implication since the right of access by its very nature calls for regulation by the State, regulation which may vary in time and in place according to the needs and resources of the community and of individuals (see Stanev v. Bulgaria [GC], no. 36760/06, § 230, ECHR 2012).
• EGMR, 15.03.2022 - 43572/18

  GRZEDA v. POLAND

  Auszug aus EGMR, 20.12.2022 - 31012/19

  Furthermore, a limitation will not be compatible with Article 6 § 1 if it does not pursue a legitimate aim and if there is not a reasonable relationship of proportionality between the means employed and the aim sought to be achieved (see Grzeda v. Poland [GC], no. 43572/18, § 343, 15 March 2022, Lupeni Greek Catholic Parish and Others, cited above,§ 89; see also Waite and Kennedy v. Germany [GC], no. 26083/94, § 59, ECHR 1999-I and Cordova v. Italy (no. 1), no. 40877/98, § 54, ECHR 2003-I).
• EGMR, 21.09.1994 - 17101/90

  FAYED c. ROYAUME-UNI

  Auszug aus EGMR, 20.12.2022 - 31012/19

  However, it would not be consistent with the rule of law in a democratic society, or with the basic principle underlying Article 6 § 1, if a State could, without restraint or control by the Court, remove from the jurisdiction of the courts a whole range of civil claims or confer immunities on categories of persons (see Fayed v. the United Kingdom, 21 September 1994, § 65, Series A no. 294-B; Syngelidis v. Greece, no. 24895/07, § 42, 11 February 2010; and Anagnostou-Dedouli v. Greece, no. 24779/08, § 48, 16 September 2010).
• EGMR, 17.12.2002 - 35373/97

  A. c. ROYAUME-UNI

  Auszug aus EGMR, 20.12.2022 - 31012/19

  That does not mean, however, that parliamentary immunity can be regarded in principle as imposing a disproportionate restriction on the right of access to a court, as embodied in Article 6 § 1. Just as the right of access to a court is an inherent part of the fair-trial guarantee in that Article, so some restrictions on access must likewise be regarded as inherent, an example being those limitations generally accepted by the Contracting States as part of the doctrine of parliamentary immunity (see A. v. the United Kingdom, no. 35373/97, § 83, ECHR 2002-X and Tsalkitzis v. Greece, no. 11801/04, § 45, 16 November 2006).
• EGMR, 27.11.2003 - 62902/00

  ZOLLMANN c. ROYAUME-UNI

  Auszug aus EGMR, 20.12.2022 - 31012/19

  Second, the Court examines whether the limitation in question is proportionate to the aims pursued, in particular whether the person concerned has reasonable alternative means to protect effectively his or her rights and if the immunity is attached only to the exercise of parliamentary functions (A., cited above, § 86, and Zollmann v. the United Kingdom (dec.), no. 62902/00, ECHR 2003-XII).