Rechtsprechung
EGMR, 23.10.1995 - 15963/90, 33/1994/480/562 |
Volltextveröffentlichungen (3)
- Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte
GRADINGER c. AUTRICHE
Art. 6, Art. 6 Abs. 1, Art. 41, Art. 57, Protokoll Nr. 7 Art. 4, Art. 35, Art. 35 Abs. 3 MRK
Violation de l'art. 6-1 (accès) Non-lieu à examiner l'art. 6-1 (publiquement) Exception préliminaire rejetée (réserve) Exception préliminaire rejetée (ratione temporis) Violation de P7-4 Remboursement partiel frais et dépens - procédure nationale Remboursement ... - Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte
GRADINGER v. AUSTRIA
Art. 6, Art. 6 Abs. 1, Art. 41, Art. 57, Protokoll Nr. 7 Art. 4, Art. 35, Art. 35 Abs. 3 MRK
Violation of Art. 6-1 (access) Not necessary to examine Art. 6-1 (publicly) Preliminary objection rejected (reservation) Preliminary objection rejected (ratione temporis) Violation of P7-4 Costs and expenses partial award - domestic proceedings Costs and expenses ... - juris(Abodienst) (Volltext/Leitsatz)
Verfahrensgang
- EKMR, 10.05.1993 - 15963/90
- EKMR, 19.05.1994 - 15963/90
- EGMR, 28.09.1995 - 15963/90
- EGMR, 23.10.1995 - 15963/90, 33/1994/480/562
Papierfundstellen
- Serie A Nr. 328-C
Wird zitiert von ... (115) Neu Zitiert selbst (13)
- EGMR, 10.02.1983 - 7299/75
ALBERT ET LE COMPTE c. BELGIQUE
Auszug aus EGMR, 23.10.1995 - 15963/90
1 (art. 6-1) of the Convention - as is the case in this instance with the district authority and the regional government (see paragraphs 9 and 10 above) - must be subject to subsequent control by a "judicial body that has full jurisdiction" (see, inter alia and mutatis mutandis, the following judgments: Albert and Le Compte v. Belgium of 10 February 1983, Series A no. 58, p. 16, para. 29; Öztürk, previously cited, pp. 21-22, para. 56; and Fischer v. Austria of 26 April 1995, Series A no. 312, p. 17, para. 28).53; the Albert and Le Compte v. Belgium judgment of 10 February 1983, Series A no. 58, p. 17, para.
- EGMR, 26.04.1995 - 16922/90
FISCHER c. AUTRICHE
Auszug aus EGMR, 23.10.1995 - 15963/90
1 (art. 6-1) of the Convention - as is the case in this instance with the district authority and the regional government (see paragraphs 9 and 10 above) - must be subject to subsequent control by a "judicial body that has full jurisdiction" (see, inter alia and mutatis mutandis, the following judgments: Albert and Le Compte v. Belgium of 10 February 1983, Series A no. 58, p. 16, para. 29; Öztürk, previously cited, pp. 21-22, para. 56; and Fischer v. Austria of 26 April 1995, Series A no. 312, p. 17, para. 28).For the rest, I refer to the methodological objections to this "test" that I raised in paragraph 18 of my separate opinion in the case of Fischer v. Austria (judgment of 26 April 1995, Series A no. 312).
- EGMR, 23.06.1981 - 6878/75
LE COMPTE, VAN LEUVEN ET DE MEYERE c. BELGIQUE
Auszug aus EGMR, 23.10.1995 - 15963/90
[6] See, inter alia, the Le Compte, Van Leuven and De Meyere v. Belgium judgment of 23 June 1981, Series A no. 43, pp.
- EGMR, 26.09.1995 - 18160/91
DIENNET v. FRANCE
Auszug aus EGMR, 23.10.1995 - 15963/90
30; see also the Diennet v. France judgment of 26 September 1995, Series A no. 325-A, pp. - EGMR, 23.10.1995 - 15523/89
SCHMAUTZER v. AUSTRIA
Auszug aus EGMR, 23.10.1995 - 15963/90
31/1994/478/560, 32/1994/479/561, 35/1994/482/564, 36/1994/483/565 and 37/1994/484/566. - EGMR, 23.10.1995 - 16718/90
PALAORO v. AUSTRIA
Auszug aus EGMR, 23.10.1995 - 15963/90
31/1994/478/560, 32/1994/479/561, 35/1994/482/564, 36/1994/483/565 and 37/1994/484/566. - EGMR, 23.10.1995 - 15527/89
UMLAUFT c. AUTRICHE
Auszug aus EGMR, 23.10.1995 - 15963/90
31/1994/478/560, 32/1994/479/561, 35/1994/482/564, 36/1994/483/565 and 37/1994/484/566. - EGMR, 23.10.1995 - 16841/90
PFARRMEIER c. AUTRICHE
Auszug aus EGMR, 23.10.1995 - 15963/90
31/1994/478/560, 32/1994/479/561, 35/1994/482/564, 36/1994/483/565 and 37/1994/484/566. - EGMR, 23.10.1995 - 16713/90
PRAMSTALLER v. AUSTRIA
Auszug aus EGMR, 23.10.1995 - 15963/90
31/1994/478/560, 32/1994/479/561, 35/1994/482/564, 36/1994/483/565 and 37/1994/484/566. - EGMR, 21.02.1984 - 8544/79
Öztürk ./. Deutschland
Auszug aus EGMR, 23.10.1995 - 15963/90
In order to determine whether an offence qualifies as "criminal" for the purposes of the Convention, it is first necessary to ascertain whether or not the provision (art. 6-1) defining the offence belongs, in the legal system of the respondent State, to criminal law; next the "very nature of the offence" and the degree of severity of the penalty risked must be considered (see, among other authorities, the Öztürk v. Germany judgment of 21 February 1984, Series A no. 73, p. 18, para. 50, and the Demicoli v. Malta judgment of 27 August 1991, Series A no. 210, pp. 15-17, paras. 31-34). - EGMR, 29.04.1988 - 10328/83
BELILOS v. SWITZERLAND
- EGMR, 27.08.1991 - 13057/87
DEMICOLI v. MALTA
- EGMR, 25.08.1993 - 13308/87
CHORHERR v. AUSTRIA
- EGMR, 11.07.2006 - 54810/00
Einsatz von Brechmitteln; Selbstbelastungsfreiheit (Schutzbereich; faires …
Er kann aber bezüglich des Verfahrensausgangs keine Mutmaßungen anstellen, wenn keine Konventionsverletzung vorgelegen hätte (siehe insbesondere Schmautzer ./. Österreich , Urteil vom 23. Oktober 1995, Serie A Bd. 328, S. 16, Rdnr. 44, und Findlay ./. Vereinigtes Königreich , Urteil vom 25. Februar 1997, Sammlung 1997-I, S. 284, Rdnr. 85). - EGMR, 27.09.2011 - 43509/08
A. MENARINI DIAGNOSTICS S.R.L. c. ITALIE
Pour la Cour, il n'est pas nécessaire que l'organe ou la personne ayant prononcé une sanction respecte pleinement les règles énoncées par l'article 6 dès lors que la sanction peut subir le contrôle ultérieur d'un « tribunal'présentant les garanties de cet article et ayant « pleine juridiction'sur l'affaire (voir l'arrêt-clé Öztürk c. Allemagne, 21 février 1984, § 56, série A no 73, qui s'est penché pour la première fois sur les infractions administratives, Ordnungswidrigkeiten en droit allemand de la route, et a été confirmé par les arrêts Schmautzer c. Autriche, 23 octobre 1995, § 34, série A no 328-A, Umlauft c. Autriche, 23 octobre 1995, § 37, série A no 328-B, Gradinger c. Autriche, 23 octobre 1995, § 42, série A no 328-C, Pramstaller c. Autriche, 23 octobre 1995, § 39, série A no 329-A, Palaoro c. Autriche, 23 octobre 1995, § 41, série A no 329-B, et Pfarrmeier c. Autriche, 23 octobre 1995, § 38, série A no 329-C, qui se sont penchés sur les contraventions administratives, Verwaltungsübertretungen en droit autrichien de la route et, dans l'affaire Pramstaller, en droit autrichien de la construction civile ; je laisse de côté la question épineuse de savoir si la notion de « pleine juridiction'dans le domaine non pénal doit être soumise à un traitement juridique différent, voire moins exigeant, que celui donné dans le domaine pénal ; sur cette question, voir les arguments de F. Sudre, note sous Cass.com., 29 avril 1997, Ferreira c/DGI, JCP, 1997, éd. - EGMR, 10.02.2009 - 14939/03
Sergeï Zolotoukhine ./. Russland
The Court reiterates that the aim of Article 4 of Protocol No. 7 is to prohibit the repetition of criminal proceedings that have been concluded by a final decision (see Franz Fischer v. Austria, no. 37950/97, § 22, 29 May 2001, and Gradinger v. Austria, judgment of 23 October 1995, Series A no. 328-C, § 53).
- EGMR, 15.11.2016 - 24130/11
A ET B c. NORVÈGE
(It should be noted that the reservations made by Austria and Italy have been held to be invalid as they failed to provide a brief statement of the law concerned, as required by Article 57 § 2 of the Convention (see respectively Gradinger v. Austria, 23 October 1995, § 51, Series A no. 328-C; and Grande Stevens, cited above, §§ 204-211), unlike the reservation made by France (see Göktan v. France, no. 33402/96, § 51, ECHR 2002-V). - EGMR, 04.03.2014 - 18640/10
GRANDE STEVENS AND OTHERS v. ITALY
As to the case-law of the Court cited by the applicants (Gradinger v. Austria (23 October 1995, Series A no. 328-C), Sergey Zolotukhin v. Russia [GC], no. 14939/03, ECHR 2009), Maresti v. Croatia (no. 55759/07, 25 June 2009) and Ruotsalainen v. Finland (no. 13079/03, 16 June 2009)), it was not relevant to this case, since it concerned cases where a single act had been punished by criminal and administrative penalties and where the latter had a punitive element and could include a custodial sentence or (as in the Ruotsalainen case) were for a sum higher than the criminal fine.However, a reservation which does not refer to or mention those specific provision of the Italian legal order which exclude offences or proceedings from the scope of Article 4 of Protocol No. 7 does not afford to a sufficient degree a guarantee that [it] does not go beyond the provision expressly excluded by the Contracting State (see, mutatis mutandis, Chorherr v. Austria, 25 August 1993, § 20, Series A no. 266-B; Gradinger v. Austria, 23 October 1995, § 51, Series A no. 328-C; and Eisenstecken, cited above, § 29; see also, in contrast, Kozlova and Smirnova v. Latvia (dec.), no. 57381/00, ECHR 2001-XI).
- EuGH, 15.10.2002 - C-238/99
Limburgse Vinyl Maatschappij (LVM) / Kommission
Maßgebend sei, ob die Entscheidung PVC II auf dasselbe Verhalten gestützt werde, das bereits Gegenstand des Urteils des Gerichtshofes vom 15. Juni 1994 gewesen sei (Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte, Urteil Gradinger vom 23. Oktober 1995, Serie A Nr. 328 C, § 55). - EGMR, 29.05.2001 - 37950/97
FRANZ FISCHER v. AUSTRIA
The applicant argued that, in the light of the Court's Gradinger v. Austria judgment (23 October 1995, Series A no. 328-C), the decision of the Regional Court should be quashed. - EGMR, 30.07.1998 - 25711/94
OLIVEIRA v. SWITZERLAND
En tout cas, l'affaire se distinguerait sur trois points de l'affaire Gradinger c. Autriche (arrêt du 23 octobre 1995, série A n° 328-C): il n'y aurait pas eu contradiction dans l'appréciation des faits par les deux autorités saisies, la première d'entre elles n'aurait pas pu examiner le comportement litigieux à la lumière de tous ses aspects, en raison de la compétence limitée du juge de police et, enfin, la requérante n'aurait pas été désavantagée par la séparation de la procédure.Arrêt Gradinger c. Autriche du 23 octobre 1995, série A n° 328-C, p. 66, § 55.
- EGMR, 27.05.2014 - 4455/10
MARGUS v. CROATIA
The aim of Article 4 of Protocol No. 7 is to prohibit the repetition of criminal proceedings that have been concluded by a final decision (see Franz Fischer v. Austria, no. 37950/97, § 22, 29 May 2001, and Gradinger v. Austria, 23 October 1995, § 53, Series A no. 328-C). - Generalanwalt beim EuGH, 02.09.2021 - C-117/20
Generalanwalt Bobek schlägt eine einheitliche Prüfung für den Schutz gegen …
48 Vgl. jedoch das Urteil des EGMR vom 23. Oktober 1995, Gradinger / Österreich (CE:ECHR:1995:1023JUD001596390). - EGMR, 05.10.2006 - 75204/01
Menschenrechte: Überlange Verfahrensdauer eines sozialgerichtlichen Verfahrens
- EGMR, 05.10.2006 - 45106/04
MARCELLO VIOLA c. ITALIE
- Generalanwalt beim EuGH, 19.09.2002 - C-187/01
NACH ANSICHT DES GENERALANWALTS IST ES NACH DEM IN DEM ÜBEREINKOMMEN ZUR …
- EGMR, 20.07.2004 - 50178/99
NIKITINE c. RUSSIE
- EGMR, 21.07.2011 - 32181/04
SIGMA RADIO TELEVISION LTD v. CYPRUS
- EGMR, 19.10.2006 - 4483/02
ASCI c. AUTRICHE
- EGMR, 02.09.2004 - 77413/01
BACHMAIER v. AUSTRIA
- EGMR, 30.05.2002 - 38275/97
W.F. v. AUSTRIA
- EGMR, 17.02.2015 - 41604/11
BOMAN v. FINLAND
- EGMR, 11.09.2001 - 38275/97
W.F. v. AUSTRIA
- EGMR, 21.03.2000 - 32502/96
RUSCHAK v. AUSTRIA
- EGMR, 21.03.2000 - 37950/97
FRANZ FISCHER v. AUSTRIA
- EGMR, 21.03.2000 - 33979/96
EDELMAYER v. AUSTRIA
- EGMR, 08.02.2000 - 34186/96
FREUNBERGER v. AUSTRIA
- EGMR, 20.05.2014 - 11828/11
NYKÄNEN v. FINLAND
- EGMR, 18.07.2013 - 56422/09
SCHÄDLER-EBERLE v. LIECHTENSTEIN
- EGMR, 10.02.2005 - 64387/01
Überlange Verfahrensdauer
- EKMR, 14.01.1998 - 28332/95
H.B. v. SWITZERLAND
- EuGH, 15.10.2002 - C-251/99
Enichem / Kommission
- EGMR, 29.06.2006 - 27250/02
Menschrechtskonvention: Überlange Verfahrensdauer, Zivilrechtsstreit
- EGMR, 03.10.2000 - 29477/95
EISENSTECKEN c. AUTRICHE
- EGMR, 13.06.2017 - 41788/11
SIMKUS v. LITHUANIA
- EGMR, 14.09.1999 - 36855/97
PONSETTI ET CHESNEL contre la FRANCE
- EGMR, 26.10.2021 - 20962/15
KINDLHOFER v. AUSTRIA
- EGMR, 21.03.2006 - 70074/01
VALICO S.R.L. c. ITALIE
- EGMR, 01.02.2007 - 12277/04
STORBR?TEN v. NORWAY
- EGMR, 20.10.2015 - 40378/10
FAZIA ALI v. THE UNITED KINGDOM
- EGMR, 14.09.2004 - 60619/00
ROSENQUIST v. SWEDEN
- EGMR, 20.05.2014 - 758/11
HÄKKÄ v. FINLAND
- EGMR, 20.05.2014 - 37394/11
GLANTZ v. FINLAND
- EGMR, 07.12.2006 - 37301/03
HAUSER-SPORN v. AUSTRIA
- EGMR, 02.07.2002 - 33402/96
GOKTAN v. FRANCE
- EGMR, 23.10.1995 - 15527/89
UMLAUFT c. AUTRICHE
- EGMR, 23.10.1995 - 16718/90
PALAORO v. AUSTRIA
- EGMR, 27.01.2015 - 17039/13
RINAS v. FINLAND
- EGMR, 11.12.2012 - 3653/05
ASADBEYLI AND OTHERS v. AZERBAIJAN
- EGMR, 10.01.2008 - 1679/03
Rechtssache G. gegen DEUTSCHLAND
- EGMR, 23.10.1995 - 16841/90
PFARRMEIER c. AUTRICHE
- EGMR, 08.10.2020 - 67334/13
BAJCIC v. CROATIA
- EGMR, 15.01.2013 - 18640/10
GRANDE STEVENS ET AUTRES c. ITALIE
- EGMR, 26.07.2007 - 18015/03
SCHUTTE v. AUSTRIA
- EGMR, 26.07.2007 - 18294/03
STEMPFER v. AUSTRIA
- EGMR, 06.04.2000 - 31827/96
J.B. v. SWITZERLAND
- EGMR, 23.10.1995 - 15523/89
SCHMAUTZER v. AUSTRIA
- EGMR, 13.09.2016 - 64735/14
BIAGIOLI v. SAN MARINO
- EGMR, 10.02.2015 - 53753/12
KIIVERI v. FINLAND
- EGMR, 27.01.2009 - 9631/04
CARLBERG v. SWEDEN
- EGMR, 06.10.2005 - 69584/01
Rechtssache G. M. gegen DEUTSCHLAND
- EGMR, 20.01.2005 - 64387/01
Recht auf Verfahrensbeschleunigung (unangemessene Gesamtverfahrensdauer eines …
- Generalanwalt beim EuGH, 25.10.2001 - C-254/99
ICI / Kommission
- EGMR, 02.11.2010 - 37586/06
LIEPAJNIEKS v. LATVIA
- EGMR, 14.02.2004 - 63151/00
STECK-RISCH and OTHERS v. LIECHTENSTEIN
- EGMR, 08.04.2003 - 41265/98
MANASSON v. SWEDEN
- EGMR, 06.06.2002 - 38237/97
SAILER v. AUSTRIA
- EGMR, 30.05.2000 - 31982/96
R.T. v. SWITZERLAND
- EGMR, 28.05.2020 - 44612/13
GEORGOULEAS AND NESTORAS v. GREECE
- EGMR, 28.03.2017 - 33898/15
VANNUCCI v. SAN MARINO
- EGMR, 23.06.2015 - 8516/07
BUTNARU ET BEJAN-PISER c. ROUMANIE
- EGMR, 10.02.2015 - 53197/13
ÖSTERLUND v. FINLAND
- EGMR, 29.10.2013 - 24935/04
S.C. IMH SUCEAVA S.R.L. c. ROUMANIE
- EGMR, 21.09.2006 - 59892/00
MASZNI c. ROUMANIE
- EGMR, 15.03.2005 - 70982/01
HORCIAG c. ROUMANIE
- EGMR, 30.09.2004 - 6072/02
FALKNER v. AUSTRIA
- EGMR, 04.03.2004 - 47650/99
SILVESTER'S HORECA SERVICE c. BELGIQUE
- EGMR, 23.09.2003 - 54334/00
LEXA v. SLOVAKIA
- EGMR, 03.10.2002 - 46133/99
SMIRNOVA v. RUSSIA
- EGMR, 31.08.1999 - 34311/96
HUBNER v. AUSTRIA
- EKMR, 07.03.1996 - 20972/92
RANINEN v. FINLAND
- EGMR, 23.10.1995 - 16713/90
PRAMSTALLER v. AUSTRIA
- EGMR, 31.01.2017 - 46479/10
BENAVENT DÍAZ c. ESPAGNE
- EGMR, 09.07.2015 - 73748/13
TOLMACHEV v. ESTONIA
- EGMR, 12.06.2008 - 32071/04
MENELAOU v. CYPRUS
- EGMR, 29.06.2006 - 9470/242179416/05
- EGMR, 13.12.2005 - 35312/02
RYSHKEVICH v. UKRAINE
- EGMR, 27.04.2004 - 59028/00
STANCA contre la ROUMANIE
- EGMR, 30.03.2004 - 65823/01
GOLINELLI et FREYMUTH contre la FRANCE
- EGMR, 05.12.2002 - 70579/01
MAIER v. AUSTRIA
- EGMR, 05.12.2002 - 54272/00
LIEDERMANN v. AUSTRIA
- EGMR, 21.03.2000 - 33732/96
SCHLAGER v. AUSTRIA
- EKMR, 09.12.1997 - 31503/96
WICKRAMSINGHE v. THE UNITED KINGDOM
- EKMR, 29.11.1995 - 23103/93
A.B. v. POLAND
- EGMR, 27.11.2008 - 77989/01
GONCHAROVY v. RUSSIA
- EGMR, 17.06.2008 - 44298/02
SYNNELIUS AND EDSBERGS TAXI AB v. SWEDEN
- EGMR, 04.03.2008 - 2529/04
GARRETTA c. FRANCE
- EGMR, 07.12.2006 - 34334/04
HARUTYUNYAN v. ARMENIA
- EGMR, 28.09.2004 - 59892/00
MASZNI c. ROUMANIE
- EGMR, 19.06.2001 - 42213/98
OUESLATI contre la FRANCE
- EGMR, 10.05.2001 - 38237/97
G.S. v. AUSTRIA
- EGMR, 20.03.2001 - 38716/97
HANGL v. AUSTRIA
- EGMR, 16.05.2000 - 40042/98
GEORGIOU v. THE UNITED KINGDOM
- EGMR, 14.12.1999 - 37211/97
MULOT contre la FRANCE
- EKMR, 02.07.1998 - 32054/96
SAGIR v. AUSTRIA
- EKMR, 21.05.1998 - 36791/97
WILSON v. THE UNITED KINGDOM
- EKMR, 28.02.1996 - 25809/94
HORST v. AUSTRIA
- EKMR, 28.02.1996 - 26510/95
H.S. v. AUSTRIA
- EKMR, 13.09.1995 - 26173/95
MLECZKO v. POLAND
- EGMR, 25.06.2009 - 44046/07
MAGGAFINIS c. GRECE
- EGMR, 12.12.2006 - 34096/02
ZIVULINSKAS v. LITHUANIA
- EKMR, 17.01.1996 - 22541/93
MARTE AND ACHBERGER v. AUSTRIA
- EGMR, 21.09.2021 - 53195/16
IGNJATIC v. CROATIA
- EGMR, 13.04.2021 - 20409/11
MATEVOSYAN v. ARMENIA
- EGMR, 22.11.2005 - 75602/01
SUNDQVIST v. FINLAND
- EGMR, 27.01.2005 - 73453/01
SMOLICKIS c. LETTONIE
- EGMR, 14.09.1999 - 39031/97
D.C., H.S. AND A.D. v. THE UNITED KINGDOM
- EKMR, 16.01.1996 - 26808/95
HAUSER v. AUSTRIA