Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  SUSANNA ROS WESTLUND v. ICELAND

  Art. 6, Art. 6 Abs. 1, Art. 29, Art. 29 Abs. 3, Art. 41 MRK
  Violation of Art. 6-1 Pecuniary damage - claim dismissed Non-pecuniary damage - financial award Costs and expenses partial award - domestic and Convention proceedings (englisch)

Verfahrensgang

• EGMR, 06.12.2007 - 42628/04
• EGMR, 06.06.2019 - 42628/04

Wird zitiert von ... (0)Zitiert selbst (7)

alle Zitatstellen anzeigen
• EGMR, 27.10.1993 - 14448/88

  Auszug aus EGMR, 06.12.2007 - 42628/04

  It points out that one of the requirements of a "fair hearing" is "equality of arms", which implies that each party must be afforded a reasonable opportunity to present his or her case under conditions that do not place him or her at a substantial disadvantage vis-à-vis his or her opponent (Hentrich v. France, judgment of 22 September 1994, Series A no. 296-A, p. 22, § 56; Dombo Beheer B.V. v. the Netherlands, judgment of 27 October 1993, Series A no. 274, p. 19, § 38).
• EGMR, 24.06.1993 - 14518/89

  SCHULER-ZGRAGGEN c. SUISSE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 06.12.2007 - 42628/04

  The task of the European Court under the Convention is to ascertain whether the proceedings in issue, considered as a whole, including the way in which the evidence was submitted, were fair as required by Article 6 § 1 (see Schuler-Zgraggen v. Switzerland, judgment of 24 June 1993, Series A no. 263, p. 21, § 66).
• EGMR, 29.10.1991 - 11826/85

  Auszug aus EGMR, 06.12.2007 - 42628/04

  Regard must be had to the nature of the national appeal system, to the scope of the appellate court's powers and to the manner in which the applicant's interests are actually presented and protected in the appeal, particularly in the light of the nature of the issues to be decided by it, and whether these raise any questions of fact or questions of law which cannot be adequately resolved on the basis of the case-file (see for instance Helmers v. Sweden, judgment of 29 October 1991, Series A no. 212-A, p. 16, § 36; Miller v. Sweden, no. 55853/00, § 30, 8 February 2005).

• EGMR, 22.09.1994 - 13616/88

  HENTRICH v. FRANCE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 06.12.2007 - 42628/04

  It points out that one of the requirements of a "fair hearing" is "equality of arms", which implies that each party must be afforded a reasonable opportunity to present his or her case under conditions that do not place him or her at a substantial disadvantage vis-à-vis his or her opponent (Hentrich v. France, judgment of 22 September 1994, Series A no. 296-A, p. 22, § 56; Dombo Beheer B.V. v. the Netherlands, judgment of 27 October 1993, Series A no. 274, p. 19, § 38).
• EGMR, 08.02.2005 - 55853/00

  MILLER v. SWEDEN

  Auszug aus EGMR, 06.12.2007 - 42628/04

  Regard must be had to the nature of the national appeal system, to the scope of the appellate court's powers and to the manner in which the applicant's interests are actually presented and protected in the appeal, particularly in the light of the nature of the issues to be decided by it, and whether these raise any questions of fact or questions of law which cannot be adequately resolved on the basis of the case-file (see for instance Helmers v. Sweden, judgment of 29 October 1991, Series A no. 212-A, p. 16, § 36; Miller v. Sweden, no. 55853/00, § 30, 8 February 2005).
• EGMR, 19.07.1995 - 17506/90

  KEROJÄRVI v. FINLAND

  Auszug aus EGMR, 06.12.2007 - 42628/04

  Moreover, the procedure must be such as to allow the proper participation of the parties to the proceedings (Kerojärvi v. Finland, judgment of 19 July 1995, Series A no. 322, p. 16, § 42).
• EGMR, 15.07.2003 - 44671/98

  SIGURÞÓR ARNARSSON v. ICELAND

  Auszug aus EGMR, 06.12.2007 - 42628/04

  In the light of this and bearing in mind what was at stake for the applicant, the Court finds that the question of her liability to pay compensation to G. could not, as a matter of fair trial, have been properly determined by the Supreme Court without a direct assessment of the evidence given by the parties in person (see, Ekbatani v. Sweden, judgment of 26 May 1988, Series A no. 134, p. 14, § 32; Sigurór Arnarsson v. Iceland, no. 44671/98, § 36, 15 July 2003).

alle Zitatstellen anzeigen