Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  LAAKSO v. FINLAND

  Art. 6, Art. 6 Abs. 1, Art. 8, Art. 8 Abs. 1, Art. 25, Art. 25 Abs. 1, Art. 35, Art. 35 Abs. 1, Art. 57, Art. 34 MRK
  Inadmissible (englisch)

Wird zitiert von ... (0)Neu Zitiert selbst (7)

• EKMR, 09.04.1997 - 26739/95

  HELIN AND OTHERS v. FINLAND

  Auszug aus EKMR, 03.12.1997 - 26320/95

  On 2 December 1994 the applicant introduced an application before the Commission on behalf of his fellow prisoners on Ward I-2 (Application No. 26739/95, Dec. 9.4.97, unpublished).

  By transferring him away from Ward I-2 the Prison Governor attempted to prevent him from pursuing both his own application before the Commission as well as No. 26739/95 which he had lodged on behalf of his fellow prisoners.

• EGMR, 27.02.1980 - 6903/75

  DEWEER c. BELGIQUE

  Auszug aus EKMR, 03.12.1997 - 26320/95

  The burden of proving the existence of available and sufficient remedies lies upon the State (Eur. Court HR, Deweer judgment of 27 February 1980, Series A no. 35, p. 15, para. 26).
• EGMR, 12.07.1988 - 10862/84

  SCHENK c. SUISSE

  Auszug aus EKMR, 03.12.1997 - 26320/95

  In particular, it is not competent to deal with an application alleging that errors of law or fact have been committed by domestic courts, except where it considers that such errors might have involved a possible violation of any of the rights and freedoms set out in the Convention (see, e.g., Eur. Court HR, Schenk v. Switzerland judgment of 12 July 1988, Series A no. 140, p. 29, para. 45).

 
• EGMR, 23.11.1993 - 14838/89

  A. v. FRANCE

  Auszug aus EKMR, 03.12.1997 - 26320/95

  At least part of these must be considered effective and adequate for the purposes of Article 26 in (Art. 26) respect of this aspect of the complaint (cf. Eur. Court HR, A. v. France judgment of 23 November 1993, Series A no. 277-B, p. 48, para. 32; No. 25052/94, Dec. 5.7.95, D.R. 82-A, p. 102 at pp. 114-115).
• EGMR, 09.10.1997 - 25052/94

  ANDRONICOU ET CONSTANTINOU c. CHYPRE

  Auszug aus EKMR, 03.12.1997 - 26320/95

  At least part of these must be considered effective and adequate for the purposes of Article 26 in (Art. 26) respect of this aspect of the complaint (cf. Eur. Court HR, A. v. France judgment of 23 November 1993, Series A no. 277-B, p. 48, para. 32; No. 25052/94, Dec. 5.7.95, D.R. 82-A, p. 102 at pp. 114-115).
• EGMR, 28.10.1998 - 24760/94

  ASSENOV AND OTHERS v. BULGARIA

  Auszug aus EKMR, 03.12.1997 - 26320/95

  In such a situation he might not be required to embark on further attempts to obtain redress (see No. 24760/94, Dec. 27.6.96, D.R. 86-A, pp. 54, 71 and the further references therein).
• EKMR, 13.12.1982 - 9453/81

  X. c. PORTUGAL

  Auszug aus EKMR, 03.12.1997 - 26320/95

  The Commission recalls that, in accordance with the generally recognised rules of international law, the Convention only governs, for each Contracting Party, facts subsequent to the entry into force of the Convention with regard to that Party (see, e.g., No. 9453/81, Dec. 13.12.82, D.R. 31, pp. 204, 208).