Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  A.G. v. SWEDEN

  Art. 6, Art. 6 Abs. 1, Art. 6 Abs. 3 Buchst. d MRK
  Inadmissible (englisch)

Sonstiges

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte (Verfahrensmitteilung)

  [ENG]

Wird zitiert von ... (4)Neu Zitiert selbst (5)

• EKMR, 15.07.1986 - 9938/82

  BRICMONT v. BELGIUM

  Auszug aus EGMR, 10.01.2012 - 315/09

  It is normally for the national courts to decide whether it is necessary or advisable to hear a witness (see, among other authorities, Bricmont v. Belgium, judgment of 7 July 1989, Series A no. 158, § 89).
• EGMR, 21.01.1999 - 29183/95

  FRESSOZ ET ROIRE c. FRANCE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 10.01.2012 - 315/09

  In the Court's opinion this implies that an Article 6 complaint was raised in substance before these courts (see, among other authorities, Fressoz and Roire v. France [GC], no. 29183/95, §§ 37-39, ECHR 1999-I).
• EGMR, 21.01.1999 - 30544/96

  GARCÍA RUIZ v. SPAIN

  Auszug aus EGMR, 10.01.2012 - 315/09

  The Court's task under the Convention is not to give a ruling about whether statements of witnesses were properly admitted as evidence, but to ascertain whether the proceedings as a whole, including the way in which evidence was taken, were fair (see Garcia Ruiz v. Spain [GC], no. 30544/96, § 28, ECHR 1999-I).
• EGMR, 15.12.2011 - 26766/05

  Recht auf Konfrontation und Befragung von Zeugen (Recht auf ein faires Verfahren: …

  Auszug aus EGMR, 10.01.2012 - 315/09

  As a rule, these rights require that the defendant be given an adequate and proper opportunity to challenge and question a witness against him either when he was making his statements or at a later stage of the proceedings (see, for example, Saïdi v. France, judgment of 20 September 1993, Series A no. 261-C, § 43, and Al-Khawaja and Tahery v. the United Kingdom [GC], nos. 26766/05 and 22228/06, § 147, 15 December 2011).
• EGMR, 26.04.1991 - 12398/86

  ASCH v. AUSTRIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 10.01.2012 - 315/09

  Consequently, the complaint will be examined under the two provisions taken together (see, among other authorities, Asch v. Austria, judgment of 26 April 1991, Series A no. 203, § 25).

• EGMR, 15.12.2015 - 9154/10

  Recht auf Konfrontation und Befragung von Zeugen (Al-Khawaja-Test; Recht auf ein …

  Diese Rechte schreiben in der Regel vor, dass dem Beschuldigten eine angemessene und ausreichende Möglichkeit eingeräumt wird, die belastenden Zeugenaussagen anzugreifen und deren Urheber entweder im Zuge der Aussage oder zu einem späteren Zeitpunkt zu befragen (…Al-Khawaja und Tahery, a.a.O., Rdnr. 118, m.w.N.; siehe auch A.G../. Schweden (Entsch.), Nr. 315/09, 10. Januar 2012, und Trampevski./. ehemalige jugoslawische Republik Mazedonien, Nr. 4570/07, Rdnr. 44, 10.
• OLG Hamm, 03.11.2023 - 13 UF 106/22

  Umgangsausschluss; Antragszurückweisung

  A. lebt seit der Trennung der Eltern im Jahr 2009 bei der Kindesmutter.In einem ersten Umgangsverfahren vor dem Familiengericht Münster, Az.: 39 F 315/09, trafen die Kindeseltern eine Umgangsregelung für die Dauer von 6 Monaten und vereinbarten die Durchführung von Beratungsgesprächen.
• EGMR, 18.07.2013 - 59632/09

  VRONCHENKO v. ESTONIA

  While it is true that it was for the investigating authorities to decide on the use of investigative measures, it is noteworthy that they did not address the applicant's requests, let alone offer any alternatives less disturbing for the victim, such as allowing the applicant's counsel to take part in the interview, or giving the defence an opportunity to indirectly put questions to E. (see, for example, A.G. v. Sweden (dec.), no. 315/09, 10 January 2012, where the applicant's defence counsel was present in an adjoining room during a police interview of the presumed victim and posed questions to her via the police inspector interviewing her).
• EGMR, 02.04.2013 - 25307/10

  D.T. v. THE NETHERLANDS

  The Court considers that the applicant, invoking Article 6 of the Convention, complained about this issue in substance before the Supreme Court (see paragraph 28 above) and that the issues of examination of witnesses and counterbalancing measures taken in the absence of such examination were both addressed by the Supreme Court (see paragraph 29 above) (see, among many other authorities and mutatis mutandis, Fressoz and Roire v. France [GC], no. 29183/95, §§ 37-39, ECHR 1999-I and as a more recent example, A.G. v. Sweden (dec.), no. 315/09, 10 January 2012).