Rechtsprechung
   EGMR, 26.07.2011 - 35485/05, 35680/05, 36085/05, 45553/05   

Zitiervorschläge
https://dejure.org/2011,57169
EGMR, 26.07.2011 - 35485/05, 35680/05, 36085/05, 45553/05 (https://dejure.org/2011,57169)
EGMR, Entscheidung vom 26.07.2011 - 35485/05, 35680/05, 36085/05, 45553/05 (https://dejure.org/2011,57169)
EGMR, Entscheidung vom 26. Juli 2011 - 35485/05, 35680/05, 36085/05, 45553/05 (https://dejure.org/2011,57169)
Tipp: Um den Kurzlink (hier: https://dejure.org/2011,57169) schnell in die Zwischenablage zu kopieren, können Sie die Tastenkombination Alt + R verwenden - auch ohne diesen Bereich zu öffnen.

Volltextveröffentlichung

  • Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

    HUSEYN AND OTHERS v. AZERBAIJAN

    Art. 6, Art. 6 Abs. 1, Art. 6 Abs. 2, Art. 6 Abs. 3, Art. 6 Abs. 3 Buchst. b, Art. 6 Abs. 3 Buchst. c, Art. 6 Abs. 3 Buchst. d, Art. 35, Art. 35 Abs. 1, Art. 41 MRK
    Preliminary objection dismissed (non-exhaustion of domestic remedies) Remainder inadmissible Violation of Art. 6-1 and 6-3-b Violation of Art. 6-1 and 6-3-c Violation of Art. 6-1 and 6-3-d Violation of Art. 6-2 Non-pecuniary damage - award ...

Sonstiges

 
Sortierung


Kontextvorschau



Hinweis: Klicken Sie auf das Sprechblasensymbol, um eine Kontextvorschau im Fließtext zu sehen. Um alle zu sehen, genügt ein Doppelklick.

Wird zitiert von ... (25)Neu Zitiert selbst (35)

  • EGMR, 26.10.1984 - 9186/80

    DE CUBBER v. BELGIUM

    Auszug aus EGMR, 26.07.2011 - 35485/05
    As regards the type of proof required, the Court has, for example, sought to ascertain whether a judge has displayed hostility or ill-will for personal reasons (see De Cubber v. Belgium, 26 October 1984, § 25, Series A no. 86).

    The Court notes that proceedings, viewed as a whole, can be considered fair if any defects of the original trial are subsequently remedied by the appeal courts (see, mutatis mutandis, Edwards v. the United Kingdom, 16 December 1992, § 39, Series A no. 247-B, and De Cubber, cited above, § 33, Series A no. 86, with further reference to Adolf v. Austria, 26 March 1982, §§ 38-40, Series A no. 49).

  • EGMR, 27.10.1993 - 14448/88

    DOMBO BEHEER B.V. v. THE NETHERLANDS

    Auszug aus EGMR, 26.07.2011 - 35485/05
    The requirement of equality of arms, in the sense of a "fair balance" between the parties, applies in principle to both criminal and civil cases; in criminal cases a lesser degree of latitude is allowed for any deviations from that requirement (see Dombo Beheer B.V. v. the Netherlands, 27 October 1993, §§ 32-33, Series A no. 274).
  • EGMR, 12.07.1988 - 10862/84

    SCHENK c. SUISSE

    Auszug aus EGMR, 26.07.2011 - 35485/05
    In particular, it is not its function to deal with errors of fact or of law allegedly committed by a national court unless and in so far as they may have infringed rights and freedoms protected by the Convention (see Schenk v. Switzerland, 12 July 1988, § 45, Series A no. 140).
     
  • EGMR, 13.05.1980 - 6694/74

    ARTICO c. ITALIE

    Auszug aus EGMR, 26.07.2011 - 35485/05
    However, if a failure by legal-aid counsel to provide effective representation is manifest or is sufficiently brought to the authorities" attention in some other way, the authorities must take steps to ensure that the accused effectively enjoys the right to legal assistance (see Artico v. Italy, 13 May 1980, §§ 33-37, Series A no. 37, and Kamasinski v. Austria, 19 December 1989, § 65, Series A no. 168).
  • EGMR, 19.12.1989 - 9783/82

    KAMASINSKI v. AUSTRIA

    Auszug aus EGMR, 26.07.2011 - 35485/05
    However, if a failure by legal-aid counsel to provide effective representation is manifest or is sufficiently brought to the authorities" attention in some other way, the authorities must take steps to ensure that the accused effectively enjoys the right to legal assistance (see Artico v. Italy, 13 May 1980, §§ 33-37, Series A no. 37, and Kamasinski v. Austria, 19 December 1989, § 65, Series A no. 168).
  • EGMR, 15.06.1992 - 12433/86

    LÜDI v. SWITZERLAND

    Auszug aus EGMR, 26.07.2011 - 35485/05
    As a general 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 makes his statements or at a later stage (see, among other authorities, Asch v. Austria, 26 April 1991, § 27, Series A no. 203; Lüdi v. Switzerland, 15 June 1992, § 47, Series A no. 238; and Saïdi v. France, 20 September 1993, § 43, Series A no. 261-C).
  • EGMR, 26.04.1991 - 12398/86

    ASCH v. AUSTRIA

    Auszug aus EGMR, 26.07.2011 - 35485/05
    As a general 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 makes his statements or at a later stage (see, among other authorities, Asch v. Austria, 26 April 1991, § 27, Series A no. 203; Lüdi v. Switzerland, 15 June 1992, § 47, Series A no. 238; and Saïdi v. France, 20 September 1993, § 43, Series A no. 261-C).
  • EGMR, 10.02.1995 - 15175/89

    ALLENET DE RIBEMONT c. FRANCE

    Auszug aus EGMR, 26.07.2011 - 35485/05
    The presumption of innocence enshrined in paragraph 2 of Article 6 is one of the elements of the fair criminal trial that is required by paragraph 1 (see Allenet de Ribemont v. France, 10 February 1995, § 35, Series A no. 308).
  • EGMR, 25.03.1983 - 8660/79

    Minelli ./. Schweiz

    Auszug aus EGMR, 26.07.2011 - 35485/05
    It not only prohibits the premature expression by the tribunal itself of the opinion that the person "charged with a criminal offence" is guilty before he has been so proved according to law (see Minelli v. Switzerland, 25 March 1983, § 38, Series A no. 62), but also covers statements made by other public officials about pending criminal investigations which encourage the public to believe the suspect guilty and prejudge the assessment of the facts by the competent judicial authority (see Allenet de Ribemont, cited above, § 41, and Daktaras v. Lithuania, no. 42095/98, §§ 41-43, ECHR 2000-X).
  • EGMR, 19.04.1994 - 16034/90

    VAN DE HURK v. THE NETHERLANDS

    Auszug aus EGMR, 26.07.2011 - 35485/05
    Article 6 § 1 obliges courts to give reasons for their decisions, although this cannot be understood as requiring a detailed answer to every argument (see Van de Hurk v. the Netherlands, 19 April 1994, §§ 59 and 61, Series A no. 288, and García Ruiz v. Spain [GC], no. 30544/96, § 26, ECHR 1999-I).
  • EGMR, 26.03.1982 - 8269/78

    Adolf ./. Österreich

  • EGMR, 16.12.1992 - 13071/87

    EDWARDS c. ROYAUME-UNI

  • EGMR, 10.10.2000 - 42095/98

    DAKTARAS c. LITUANIE

  • EGMR, 09.12.1994 - 18064/91

    HIRO BALANI v. SPAIN

  • EGMR, 18.05.2004 - 67972/01

    SOMOGYI c. ITALIE

  • EGMR, 09.04.1984 - 8966/80

    GODDI v. ITALY

  • EGMR, 23.10.2008 - 13470/02

    KHUZHIN AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA

  • EGMR, 17.01.2008 - 24271/05

    ABBASOV v. AZERBAIJAN

  • EGMR, 26.06.2008 - 15435/03

    SHULEPOV v. RUSSIA

  • EGMR, 28.07.1999 - 25803/94

    Zur "Einzelfallprüfung" und "geltungszeitlichen Interpretation" im Rahmen des …

  • EGMR, 28.08.1991 - 11170/84

    Brandstetter ./. Österreich

  • EGMR, 23.11.1993 - 14032/88

    POITRIMOL c. FRANCE

  • EGMR, 06.12.1988 - 10588/83

    BARBERÀ, MESSEGUÉ AND JABARDO v. SPAIN

  • EGMR, 25.02.1992 - 10802/84

    PFEIFER ET PLANKL c. AUTRICHE

  • EGMR, 13.02.2001 - 29731/96

    Dieter Krombach

  • EGMR, 27.06.2000 - 21986/93

    Verursachung des Todes eines Gefangenen in türkischer Haft - Umfang der …

  • EGMR, 24.11.1993 - 13972/88

    IMBRIOSCIA c. SUISSE

  • EGMR, 24.05.1989 - 10486/83

    HAUSCHILDT c. DANEMARK

  • EGMR, 04.12.1995 - 18896/91

    RIBITSCH c. AUTRICHE

  • EGMR, 24.02.1993 - 14396/88

    FEY v. AUSTRIA

  • EGMR, 27.08.1992 - 12850/87

    TOMASI c. FRANCE

  • EGMR, 22.09.1994 - 14861/89

    LALA c. PAYS-BAS

  • EGMR, 13.10.2009 - 7377/03

    DAYANAN v. TURKEY

  • EGMR, 28.08.1991 - 12151/86

    F.C.B. c. ITALIE

  • EGMR, 30.09.1985 - 9300/81

    CAN v. AUSTRIA

  • EGMR, 25.07.2013 - 11082/06

    Chodorkowski: Moskauer Prozesse sind unfair

    The domestic court is free, subject to compliance with the terms of the Convention, to refuse to call witnesses proposed by the defence, for instance on the ground that the court considers their evidence unlikely to assist in ascertaining the truth (see Huseyn and Others v. Azerbaijan, nos. 35485/05, 45553/05, 35680/05 and 36085/05, § 196, 26 July 2011, with further references).
  • EGMR, 09.01.2013 - 21722/11

    OLEKSANDR VOLKOV c. UKRAINE

    In many cases where the domestic proceedings were found to be in breach of the Convention, the Court has held that the most appropriate form of reparation for the violations found could be the reopening of the domestic proceedings (see, for example, Huseyn and Others v. Azerbaijan, nos. 35485/05, 45553/05, 35680/05 and 36085/05, § 262, 26 July 2011, with further references).
  • EGMR, 25.07.2019 - 1586/15

    ROOK v. GERMANY

    Dabei wird der Gerichtshof jeden der dieser Beschwerde zugrundeliegenden Gründe prüfen, um festzustellen, ob das Verfahren insgesamt fair war (siehe, mit weiteren Nachweisen, Huseyn u. a../. Aserbaidschan, Individualbeschwerde Nr. 35485/05 und drei weitere, Rdnr. 158, 26. Juli 2011).
Haben Sie eine Ergänzung? Oder haben Sie einen Fehler gefunden? Schreiben Sie uns.
Sie können auswählen (Maus oder Pfeiltasten):
(Liste aufgrund Ihrer bisherigen Eingabe)
Komplette Übersicht