Rechtsprechung
| EGMR, 29.03.2001 - 49628/99 |
Zitiervorschläge
Tipp: Um den Kurzlink (hier: https://dejure.org/2001,40529) schnell in die Zwischenablage zu kopieren, können Sie die Tastenkombination Alt + R verwenden - auch ohne diesen Bereich zu öffnen.
Volltextveröffentlichung
- Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte
MAROTT HANSEN v. DENMARK
Art. 6, Art. 6 Abs. 1, Art. 6 Abs. 2, Art. 6 Abs. 3 Buchst. d MRK
Inadmissible (englisch)
Wird zitiert von ... (0) Neu Zitiert selbst (5)
- EGMR, 24.11.1986 - 9120/80
UNTERPERTINGER v. AUSTRIA
Auszug aus EGMR, 29.03.2001 - 49628/99
With regard to the evidence of witnesses the Court notes that, according to established case-law, the reading out at a hearing of the records of statements made by a witness cannot, in itself, be regarded as being inconsistent with Article 6, § 1 and § 3 (d) of the Convention but the use made of such statements as evidence must nevertheless comply with the rights of the defence (see inter alia Unterpertinger v. Austria judgment of 24 November 1986, Series A no. 110, p 110, § 31). - EGMR, 17.01.1970 - 2689/65
DELCOURT c. BELGIQUE
Auszug aus EGMR, 29.03.2001 - 49628/99
In this regard the Court considers that save in exceptional circumstances, requiring specific justification, witnesses must be heard in the presence of the accused at a hearing where both parties can present their arguments and which, since it is subject to public scrutiny, offers a tangible guarantee of the fairness of the proceedings (see inter alia the Delcourt v. Belgium judgment of 17 January 1997, Series A no. 11, p. 15, § 28, and the Isgrò v. Italy judgment of 21 February 1991, Series A no. 194-A, pp. 11-12, § 31). - EGMR, 06.12.1988 - 10588/83
BARBERÀ, MESSEGUÉ AND JABARDO v. SPAIN
Auszug aus EGMR, 29.03.2001 - 49628/99
As a general rule, it is for the national courts to assess the evidence before them as well as the relevance of the evidence which the defendant seeks to adduce (see, inter alia, the Barberà, Messegué and Jabardo v. Spain judgment of 6 December 1988, Series A no. 146, p. 31, § 68). - EGMR, 26.04.1991 - 12398/86
ASCH v. AUSTRIA
Auszug aus EGMR, 29.03.2001 - 49628/99
Therefore, the limitation which derived from CE's absence at the hearing did not in the Court's opinion in these circumstances restrict the right of the defence to a degree which was irreconcilable with the Convention (cf. e.g. the Asch v. Austria judgment of 26 April 1991, Series A no. 203). - EGMR, 22.04.1992 - 12351/86
VIDAL c. BELGIQUE
Auszug aus EGMR, 29.03.2001 - 49628/99
Thus, the task of the European Court is to ascertain whether the proceedings in issue, considered as a whole, were fair as required by Article 6 § 1 (see, inter alia, the Vidal v Belgium judgment of 22 April 1992, Series A no. 235-B, p 32-33, § 33).