Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  MISSENJOV v. ESTONIA

  Art. 6, Art. 6 Abs. 1, Art. 13, Art. 37, Art. 37 Abs. 1 Buchst. c, Art. 41 MRK
  Preliminary objection dismissed (struck out of the list) Violation of Art. 6-1 Violation of Art. 13 Pecuniary damage - award Non-pecuniary damage - claim dismissed (englisch)

Wird zitiert von ... (7)Zitiert selbst (12)

alle Zitatstellen anzeigen
• EGMR, 02.12.1999 - 32082/96

  Überprüfung der Länge eines in Portugal anhängigen Strafverfahrens durch den …

  Auszug aus EGMR, 29.01.2009 - 43276/06

  Preventive remedies in respect of the length of proceedings have also been found to exist, for example, in Switzerland (see Kunz v. Switzerland (dec.), no. 623/02, 21 June 2005) and Portugal (see Tomé Mota v. Portugal (dec.), no. 32082/96, ECHR 1999-IX).
• EGMR, 01.03.2005 - 15212/03

  CHARZYNSKI c. POLOGNE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 29.01.2009 - 43276/06

  The Court has also found that there was an effective remedy available in Poland where a party to the proceedings could complain about an unreasonable delay in the proceedings to a superior court which might instruct the court examining the merits of the case to take certain measures within a fixed time-limit (see Charzynski v. Poland (dec.), no. 15212/03, ECHR 2005-V; and Michalak v. Poland (dec.), no. 24549/03, 1 March 2005).
• EGMR, 01.03.2005 - 24549/03

  MICHALAK v. POLAND

  Auszug aus EGMR, 29.01.2009 - 43276/06

  The Court has also found that there was an effective remedy available in Poland where a party to the proceedings could complain about an unreasonable delay in the proceedings to a superior court which might instruct the court examining the merits of the case to take certain measures within a fixed time-limit (see Charzynski v. Poland (dec.), no. 15212/03, ECHR 2005-V; and Michalak v. Poland (dec.), no. 24549/03, 1 March 2005).

• EGMR, 07.06.2017 - 53084/99

  KORMACHEVA ET 105 AUTRES AFFAIRES CONTRE LA RUSSIE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 29.01.2009 - 43276/06

  As concerns the possibility to lodge a complaint with a view to initiating disciplinary proceedings against the judges, the Court is unable to see that such a course would have expedited the proceedings (see Kormacheva v. Russia, no. 53084/99, § 62, 29 January 2004).
• EGMR, 21.06.2005 - 623/02

  KUNZ c. SUISSE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 29.01.2009 - 43276/06

  Preventive remedies in respect of the length of proceedings have also been found to exist, for example, in Switzerland (see Kunz v. Switzerland (dec.), no. 623/02, 21 June 2005) and Portugal (see Tomé Mota v. Portugal (dec.), no. 32082/96, ECHR 1999-IX).
• EGMR, 26.10.2000 - 30210/96

  Ableitung einer allgemeinen Verpflichtung zur Entlassung eines …

  Auszug aus EGMR, 29.01.2009 - 43276/06

  The Court reiterates that Article 13 of the Convention guarantees an effective remedy before a national authority for an alleged breach of the requirement under Article 6 § 1 to hear a case within a reasonable time (see Kudla v. Poland [GC], no. 30210/96, § 156 ECHR 2000-XI).
• EGMR, 27.06.2000 - 30979/96

  Auszug aus EGMR, 29.01.2009 - 43276/06

  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).
• EGMR, 11.09.2002 - 57220/00

  MIFSUD contre la FRANCE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 29.01.2009 - 43276/06

  A remedy is therefore effective if it can be used either to expedite a decision by the courts dealing with the case, or to provide the litigant with adequate redress for delays that have already occurred (see Sürmeli v. Germany [GC], no. 75529/01, § 99, ECHR 2006-VII, and Mifsud v. France (dec.) [GC], no. 57220/00, § 17, ECHR 2002-VIII).
• EGMR, 02.12.2003 - 48129/99

  TREIAL v. ESTONIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 29.01.2009 - 43276/06

  The Court has frequently found violations of Article 6 § 1 of the Convention in cases raising issues similar to the one in the present case (see Frydlender, cited above, and also Saarekallas, cited above, Shchiglitsov v. Estonia, no. 35062/03, 18 January 2007, Treial v. Estonia, no. 48129/99, 2 December 2003).
• EGMR, 18.01.2007 - 35062/03

  SHCHIGLITSOV v. ESTONIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 29.01.2009 - 43276/06

  The Court has frequently found violations of Article 6 § 1 of the Convention in cases raising issues similar to the one in the present case (see Frydlender, cited above, and also Saarekallas, cited above, Shchiglitsov v. Estonia, no. 35062/03, 18 January 2007, Treial v. Estonia, no. 48129/99, 2 December 2003).
• EGMR, 08.11.2007 - 11548/04

  SAAREKALLAS OÜ v. ESTONIA
• EGMR, 18.03.2008 - 42496/05

  TREIAL v. ESTONIA

alle Zitatstellen anzeigen
• EGMR, 03.03.2015 - 43443/04

  CHERVYAKOV AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA

  While a failure to acknowledge a particular violation may be an element preventing an application being struck out of the Court's list (see §§ 133-139 of Gerasimov and Others, cited above, Missenjov v. Estonia, no. 43276/06, §§ 25-26, 29 January 2009; Untermayer v. Slovakia, no. 6846/08, §§ 45-46, 9 July 2013; Kiisa v. Estonia, nos.
• EGMR, 13.03.2014 - 16587/10

  KIISA v. ESTONIA

  However, the Court notes that the Government's declaration did not contain such an acknowledgment in respect of the applicants" second complaint, that under Article 13. That being so, and considering that the complaints under Article 6 § 1 and Article 13 are inseparably linked, the former not being capable of being struck out alone, the Court finds that the Government have failed to establish a sufficient basis for finding that respect for human rights as defined in the Convention and its Protocols does not require the Court to continue its examination of the case (see Missenjov v. Estonia, no. 43276/06, §§ 25-26, 29 January 2009, and Untermayer v. Slovakia, no. 6846/08, §§ 45-46, 9 July 2013).
• EGMR, 29.01.2013 - 6905/09

  [ENG]

  The Court has established in a number of cases, including those brought against Estonia, its practice concerning complaints about the violation of one's right to a hearing within a reasonable time (see, for example, Frydlender v. France [GC], no. 30979/96, § 43, ECHR 2000-VII; Cocchiarella v. Italy [GC], no. 64886/01, §§ 69-98, ECHR 2006-V; Treial v. Estonia, no. 48129/99, 2 December 2003; Shchiglitsov v. Estonia, no. 35062/03, 18 January 2007; Saarekallas OÜ v. Estonia, no. 11548/04, 8 November 2007; Missenjov v. Estonia, no. 43276/06, 29 January 2009; and Raudsepp v. Estonia, no. 54191/07, 8 November 2011).

• EGMR, 08.11.2011 - 54191/07

  RAUDSEPP v. ESTONIA

  In this context, they argued that the domestic case-law had developed since the Court's judgments in the cases of Saarekallas (cited above) and Missenjov v. Estonia (no. 43276/06, 29 January 2009), where the Court had found that no remedy in respect of length of proceedings had existed.
• EGMR, 02.03.2010 - 27669/08

  OMBLUS v. ESTONIA

  The Court has established in a number of cases, including those brought against Estonia, its practice concerning complaints about the violation of one's right to a hearing within a reasonable time (see Treial v. Estonia, no. 48129/99, 2 December 2003; Shchiglitsov v. Estonia, no. 35062/03, 18 January 2007; Saarekallas OÜ v. Estonia, no. 11548/04, 8 November 2007; and Missenjov v. Estonia, no. 43276/06, 29 January 2009).
• EGMR, 17.12.2014 - 11548/04

  SAAREKALLAS OÜ ET 4 AUTRES AFFAIRES CONTRE L'ESTONIE

  43276/06.
• EGMR, 23.09.2014 - 58600/12

  EBERHARD v. GERMANY and 1 other application

  Sie erkannte das Vorliegen von Konventionsverletzungen insoweit klar an, als ihr die Beschwerde durch den Gerichtshof übermittelt wurde (siehe Artikel 62A Abs. 1 Buchst. b der Verfahrensordnung; vgl. im Hinblick auf dieses Erfordernis auch Missenjov./. Estland, Individualbeschwerde Nr. 43276/06, Rdnr. 25, 29.