Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  OLIVARES ZÚÑIGA v. SPAIN

  Remainder inadmissible (Art. 35) Admissibility criteria;(Art. 35-3-a) Manifestly ill-founded;Violation of Article 6 - Right to a fair trial (Article 6 - Constitutional proceedings;Article 6-1 - Access to court);Pecuniary damage - claim dismissed (Article 41 - ...

Sonstiges

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte (Verfahrensmitteilung)

  OLIVARES ZÚÑIGA v. SPAIN

  Art. 1, Art. 6 Abs. 1, Art. 11, Art. 10 Abs. 1, Art. 14 MRK
  [ENG]

Wird zitiert von ...Neu Zitiert selbst (6)

• EGMR, 05.02.2015 - 22251/08

  BOCHAN v. UKRAINE (No. 2)

  Auszug aus EGMR, 15.12.2022 - 11/18

  The Court will not therefore question the judgment of the national courts as regards alleged errors of law, unless their findings can be regarded as arbitrary or manifestly unreasonable (see Bochan v. Ukraine (no. 2) [GC], no. 22251/08, § 61, ECHR 2015).
• EGMR, 24.02.1983 - 7525/76

  DUDGEON c. ROYAUME-UNI (ARTICLE 50)

  Auszug aus EGMR, 15.12.2022 - 11/18

  It follows that it cannot make an award under this head in respect of the hours the applicants themselves spent working on the case, as this time does not represent costs actually incurred by them (see Dudgeon v. the United Kingdom (Article 50), judgment of 24 February 1983, Series A no. 59, p. 10, § 22, and Robins v. the United Kingdom, judgment of 23 September 1997, Reports 1997-V, pp.
• EGMR, 21.02.1975 - 4451/70

  GOLDER c. ROYAUME-UNI

  Auszug aus EGMR, 15.12.2022 - 11/18

  The Court reiterates that the "right to a court", of which the right of access is one aspect, is not absolute (see, in particular, Golder v. the United Kingdom, 21 February 1975, § 36, Series A no. 18); it is subject to limitations permitted by implication, in particular where the conditions of admissibility of an appeal are concerned, since by its very nature it calls for regulation by the State, which enjoys a certain margin of appreciation in this regard (see García Manibardo v. Spain, no. 38695/97, § 36, ECHR 2000-II, and De la Fuente Ariza v. Spain, no. 3321/04, § 22, 8 November 2007).

 
• EGMR, 13.10.2009 - 39590/05

  FERRE GISBERT c. ESPAGNE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 15.12.2022 - 11/18

  This is the case when an excessively formalistic interpretation of a legal provision de facto prevents the consideration of the merits of a remedy attempted by a litigant (see, for example, Zvolský and Zvolská v. the Czech Republic, no. 46129/99, §§ 48-55, ECHR 2002-IX; De la Fuente Ariza, cited above, §§ 24-28; and Ferré Gisbert v. Spain, no. 39590/05, §§ 28-33, 13 October 2009).
• EGMR, 20.01.2015 - 16563/11

  ARRIBAS ANTON c. ESPAGNE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 15.12.2022 - 11/18

  Moreover, 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 Zubac v. Croatia [GC], no. 40160/12, § 78, 5 April 2018, and Arribas Antón v. Spain, no. 16563/11, § 41, 20 January 2015).
• EGMR, 12.11.2002 - 46129/99

  ZVOLSKÝ AND ZVOLSKÁ v. THE CZECH REPUBLIC

  Auszug aus EGMR, 15.12.2022 - 11/18

  This is the case when an excessively formalistic interpretation of a legal provision de facto prevents the consideration of the merits of a remedy attempted by a litigant (see, for example, Zvolský and Zvolská v. the Czech Republic, no. 46129/99, §§ 48-55, ECHR 2002-IX; De la Fuente Ariza, cited above, §§ 24-28; and Ferré Gisbert v. Spain, no. 39590/05, §§ 28-33, 13 October 2009).

• VG Hamburg, 05.03.2024 - 10 A 3684/23

  Zur Flüchtlingsrelevanz der Konversion vom schiitischen zum sunnitischen Islam …

  Iran: Ahwazis and Ahwazi v. Juni 2016, S. 8 [G 11/18]).