Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  BOBOC v. MOLDOVA

  Art. 6, Art. 6 Abs. 1, Art. 13, Art. 13+6 Abs. 1, Art. 29, Art. 29 Abs. 3, Art. 41 MRK
  Violation of Art. 6-1 Violation of Art. 13 Pecuniary damage - claim dismissed Non-pecuniary damage - award (englisch)

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

alle Zitatstellen anzeigen
• EGMR, 13.12.2001 - 45701/99

  Metropolitankirche von Bessarabien u.a. ./. Moldawien

  Auszug aus EGMR, 04.11.2008 - 27581/04

  However, such a remedy is required only for complaints that can be regarded as "arguable" under the Convention (see Metropolitan Church of Bessarabia and Others v. Moldova, no. 45701/99, § 137, ECHR 2001-XII).
• EGMR, 27.06.2000 - 30979/96

  Auszug aus EGMR, 04.11.2008 - 27581/04

  The Court reiterates that the reasonableness of the length of proceedings must be assessed in the light of the circumstances of the case and with reference to the following criteria: the complexity of the case, the conduct of the applicant and the relevant authorities, and what was at stake for the applicant in the dispute (see, among many other authorities, Frydlender v. France [GC], no. 30979/96, § 43, ECHR 2000-VII, and Cravcenco v. Moldova, no. 13012/02, § 44, 15 January 2008).
• EGMR, 10.12.1982 - 7604/76

  Auszug aus EGMR, 04.11.2008 - 27581/04

  However, the stage of proceedings reached by that date may be taken into consideration in accordance with the Court's case-law (see, for example, Foti and Others v. Italy, 10 December 1982, § 53, Series A no. 56, and Styranowski v. Poland, 30 October 1998, § 46, Reports of Judgments and Decisions 1998-VIII).

• EGMR, 04.12.1995 - 19753/92

  CIRICOSTA AND VIOLA v. ITALY

  Auszug aus EGMR, 04.11.2008 - 27581/04

  The Government submitted that the applicant's failure to object to postponements of the hearings prevented him from claiming a violation of Article 6 of the Convention (see Ciricosta and Viola v. Italy, 4 December 1995, § 32, Series A no. 337-A).
• EGMR, 23.10.2007 - 10508/02

  GJONBOCARI AND OTHERS v. ALBANIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 04.11.2008 - 27581/04

  The Court considers that the delay in the proceedings has resulted in part from the domestic courts" willingness to examine repeated and essentially similar claims between the parties to the proceedings (see, mutatis mutandis, Gjonbocari and Others v. Albania, no. 10508/02, §§ 65-67, 23 October 2007).
• EGMR, 15.01.2008 - 13012/02

  CRAVCENCO v. MOLDOVA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 04.11.2008 - 27581/04

  The Court reiterates that the reasonableness of the length of proceedings must be assessed in the light of the circumstances of the case and with reference to the following criteria: the complexity of the case, the conduct of the applicant and the relevant authorities, and what was at stake for the applicant in the dispute (see, among many other authorities, Frydlender v. France [GC], no. 30979/96, § 43, ECHR 2000-VII, and Cravcenco v. Moldova, no. 13012/02, § 44, 15 January 2008).

alle Zitatstellen anzeigen
• EGMR, 01.12.2009 - 34469/05

  TRZASKALSKA v. POLAND

  In these circumstances, the Court is of the view that all three sets of proceedings relate to the same issue, namely the applicant's attempts to obtain compensation and that therefore their duration should be examined as a whole (Cravcenco v. Moldova, no. 13012/02, § 49, 15 January 2008; Boboc v. Moldova, no. 27581/04, § 27, 4 November 2008).
• EGMR, 06.09.2011 - 10174/05

  [FRE]

  La Cour a établi dans un certain nombre d'affaires, dont celles dirigées contre la Moldova, sa pratique en ce qui concerne les griefs tirés de la violation du droit à être entendu dans un délai raisonnable (voir, par exemple, Frydlender c. France [GC], no 30979/96, § 43, CEDH 2000-VII; Cocchiarella c. Italie [GC], no 64886/01, §§ 69-98, CEDH 2006-V; Majewski c. Pologne, no 52690/99, 11 octobre 2005 ; Wende et Kukówka c. Pologne, no 56026/00, 10 mai 2007 ; Boboc c. Moldova, no 27581/04, 4 novembre 2008 ; Mazepa c. Moldova, no 1115/02, 10 mai 2007 ; et Strechie c. Moldova (déc.), no 21379/04, 2 octobre 2007).
• EGMR, 28.06.2011 - 44964/05

  [ENG]

  Cependant, pour autant qu'il s'agisse du montant de la satisfaction équitable proposée par le Gouvernement, la Cour estime qu'au vu des sommes qu'elle a octroyées à ce titre dans des affaires similaires (voir, parmi d'autres, Cravcenco c. Moldova, no 13012/02, 15 janvier 2008; Boboc c. Moldova, no 27581/04, 4 novembre 2008; Deservire SRL c. Moldova, no 17328/04, 6 octobre 2009), le montant proposé en l'occurrence ne saurait constituer une réparation adéquate.

• EGMR, 06.10.2009 - 17328/04

  DESERVIRE S.R.L. v. MOLDOVA

  They also referred to the power of the higher courts to verify compliance with the reasonable-time requirement, as expressly provided for in Article 192 of the Code of Civil Procedure (as cited in Boboc v. Moldova, no. 27581/04, § 17, 4 November 2008).
• EGMR, 06.09.2011 - 12495/05

  [FRE]

  La Cour a établi dans un certain nombre d'affaires, dont celles dirigées contre la Moldova, sa pratique en ce qui concerne les griefs tirés de la violation du droit à être entendu dans un délai raisonnable (voir, par exemple, Frydlender c. France [GC], no 30979/96, § 43, CEDH 2000-VII; Cocchiarella c. Italie [GC], no 64886/01, §§ 69-98, CEDH 2006-V; Majewski c. Pologne, no 52690/99, 11 octobre 2005 ; Wende et Kukówka c. Pologne, no 56026/00, 10 mai 2007 ; Boboc c. Moldova, no 27581/04, 4 novembre 2008 ; Mazepa c. Moldova, no 1115/02, 10 mai 2007 ; et Strechie c. Moldova (déc.), no 21379/04, 2 octobre 2007).
• EGMR, 19.01.2010 - 26654/08

  [ENG]

  The applications must therefore be regarded as having concerned the same subject-matter, and accordingly the proceedings comprised only one set of proceedings for the purposes of Article 6 § 1 of the Convention (see also Ekholm v. Finland, no. 68050/01, § 62, 24 July 2007: Cravcenco v. Moldova, no. 13012/02, § 49, 15 January 2008; Boboc v. Moldova, no. 27581/04, § 27, 4 November 2008; and Trzaskalska v. Poland, no. 34469/05, § 36, 1 December 2009).