Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  DIMITAR YANAKIEV v. BULGARIA (No. 2)

  Violation of Article 6 - Right to a fair trial (Article 6 - Enforcement proceedings;Article 6-1 - Reasonable time);Violation of Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 - Protection of property (Article 1 para. 1 of Protocol No. 1 - Peaceful enjoyment of possessions) ...

Wird zitiert von ... (19)Zitiert selbst (14)

alle Zitatstellen anzeigen
• EGMR, 18.09.2015 - 42219/07

  GHERGHINA c. ROUMANIE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 31.03.2016 - 50346/07

  The purpose of this rule is to afford the Contracting States the opportunity to prevent or put right the violations alleged against them before those allegations are submitted to the Court (see, among other authorities, Selmouni v. France [GC], no. 25803/94, § 74, ECHR 1999-V, and Gherghina v. Romania (dec.) [GC], no. 42219/07, 9 July 2015).

  Such case-law must in principle be well established and date back to the period before the application was lodged (see, among other authorities, Gherghina v. Romania (dec.) [GC], no. 42219/07, 9 July 2015; Sürmeli v. Germany [GC], no. 75529/01, § 110, ECHR 2006-VII; Norbert Sikorski v. Poland, no. 17599/05, § 115, 22 October 2009; and Zutter v. France (dec.), no. 197/96, 27 June 2000).

• EGMR, 01.07.2014 - 29920/05

  GERASIMOV v. RUSSIA and 14 other applications

  Auszug aus EGMR, 31.03.2016 - 50346/07

  29920/05, 3553/06, 18876/10, 61186/10, 21176/11, 36112/11, 36426/11, 40841/11, 45381/11, 55929/11 and 60822/11, § 182, 1 July 2014).
• EGMR, 10.02.2015 - 77818/12

  PENCHEVI v. BULGARIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 31.03.2016 - 50346/07

  In the present case, as regards the costs and expenses incurred in the domestic enforcement proceedings, the Court reiterates that it will uphold such claims only in so far as they relate to the violations it has found (see, Avdić and Others v. Bosnia and Herzegovina, nos. 28357/11, 31549/11 and 39295/11, § 51, 19 November 2013; Duraliyski v. Bulgaria, no. 45519/06, § 45, 4 March 2014; Penchevi v. Bulgaria, no. 77818/12, § 88, 10 February 2015).

• EGMR, 24.06.2003 - 44277/98

  STRETCH v. THE UNITED KINGDOM

  Auszug aus EGMR, 31.03.2016 - 50346/07

  In addition, there must be a clear causal connection between the damage claimed by the applicant and the breach (see, among other authorities, Stretch v. the United Kingdom, no. 44277/98, § 47, 24 June 2003).
• EGMR, 28.07.1999 - 25803/94

  Einstufung des in französischer Haft zugefügten Übels als Folter - Verpflichtung …

  Auszug aus EGMR, 31.03.2016 - 50346/07

  The purpose of this rule is to afford the Contracting States the opportunity to prevent or put right the violations alleged against them before those allegations are submitted to the Court (see, among other authorities, Selmouni v. France [GC], no. 25803/94, § 74, ECHR 1999-V, and Gherghina v. Romania (dec.) [GC], no. 42219/07, 9 July 2015).
• EGMR, 15.01.2009 - 33509/04

  BURDOV v. RUSSIA (No. 2)

  Auszug aus EGMR, 31.03.2016 - 50346/07

  As regards remedies in the context of enforcement of domestic judicial decisions, the Court has held that any domestic means to prevent a violation by ensuring timely enforcement is, in principle, of greatest value (see Burdov v. Russia (no. 2), no. 33509/04, § 98, ECHR 2009, and Yuriy Nikolayevich Ivanov v. Ukraine, no. 40450/04, § 65, ECHR 2009-...(extracts)).
• EGMR, 10.09.2010 - 31333/06

  McFarlane v. Ireland

  Auszug aus EGMR, 31.03.2016 - 50346/07

  Where the Government claims non-exhaustion of domestic remedies, it bears the burden of proving that the applicant has not used a remedy that was both effective and available (see Dalia v. France, 19 February 1998, § 38, Reports of Judgments and Decisions 1998-I; McFarlane v. Ireland [GC], no. 31333/06, § 107, 10 September 2010).
• EGMR, 15.10.2009 - 40450/04

  [ENG]

  Auszug aus EGMR, 31.03.2016 - 50346/07

  As regards remedies in the context of enforcement of domestic judicial decisions, the Court has held that any domestic means to prevent a violation by ensuring timely enforcement is, in principle, of greatest value (see Burdov v. Russia (no. 2), no. 33509/04, § 98, ECHR 2009, and Yuriy Nikolayevich Ivanov v. Ukraine, no. 40450/04, § 65, ECHR 2009-...(extracts)).
• EGMR, 22.10.2009 - 17599/05

  NORBERT SIKORSKI c. POLOGNE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 31.03.2016 - 50346/07

  Such case-law must in principle be well established and date back to the period before the application was lodged (see, among other authorities, Gherghina v. Romania (dec.) [GC], no. 42219/07, 9 July 2015; Sürmeli v. Germany [GC], no. 75529/01, § 110, ECHR 2006-VII; Norbert Sikorski v. Poland, no. 17599/05, § 115, 22 October 2009; and Zutter v. France (dec.), no. 197/96, 27 June 2000).
• EGMR, 23.09.2010 - 27451/09

  NAGOVITSYN AND NALGIYEV v. RUSSIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 31.03.2016 - 50346/07

  27451/09 and 60650/09, § 33, 23 September 2010).
• EGMR, 16.09.2010 - 11609/05

  KRAVCHENKO ET AUTRES AFFAIRES " LOGEMENTS MILITAIRES " c. RUSSIE
• EGMR, 31.05.2012 - 14966/04

  [FRE]
• EGMR, 26.11.2013 - 34130/04

  [FRE]
• RG, 24.10.1896 - I 197/96

  Rückforderung des auf Grund eines wider die Ehrbarkeit laufenden Vertrages zu …

alle Zitatstellen anzeigen
• EGMR, 28.05.2020 - 58364/10

  ANTONOV v. BULGARIA

  The relevant provisions governing the enforcement of final administrative court judgments under the Code of Administrative Procedure 2006 ("the 2006 Code") have been summarised in detail in Stoyanov and Tabakov v. Bulgaria, no. 34130/04, §§ 53-59, 26 November 2013, and Dimitar Yanakiev v. Bulgaria (no. 2), no. 50346/07, §§ 30-35, 31 March 2016.

  In the Court's opinion, this situation falls to be examined under the first sentence of the first paragraph of Article 1 of Protocol No. 1, which lays down the general principle of peaceful enjoyment of property (see with respect to unduly collected taxes Buffalo S.r.l. en liquidation, cited above, § 31; Eko-Elda AVEE, cited above, § 28; and Greece Intersplav v. Ukraine, no. 803/02, § 33, 9 January 2007; and cases concerning non-enforcement or delay in enforcing a final judgment against the State - with respect to monetary claims see Mancheva v. Bulgaria, no. 39609/98, §§ 65-66, 30 September 2004; Sirmanov, cited above, §§ 37-38; Pashov and Others v. Bulgaria, no. 20875/07, §§ 60-61, 5 February 2013, and with respect to State's obligations to undertake a particular action see Dimitar Yanakiev v. Bulgaria (no. 2), no. 50346/07, §§ 76-78, 31 March 2016, Stamova, cited above, §§ 59- 62, and Velkova v. Bulgaria, no. 1849/08, §§ 41-44, 13 July 2017).

• EGMR, 18.01.2018 - 66742/11

  DELINA v. BULGARIA

  The relevant domestic provisions concerning the enforcement of final administrative court judgments after 2006 have been set out in the Court's judgment in the case of Dimitar Yanakiev v. Bulgaria (no. 2), no 50346/07, §§ 30-32, 31 March 2016.

  While delays in enforcement might be justified in exceptional circumstances, only periods strictly necessary to enable the authorities to find a satisfactory solution are covered (see Dimitar Yanakiev v. Bulgaria (no. 2), no. 50346/07, § 70, 31 March 2016).

• EGMR, 17.12.2024 - 18102/04

  TAGANOVA AND OTHERS v. GEORGIA

  The one example of domestic case-law put forward by the Government (see paragraph 266 above) illustrated a situation in which the claimant in question had not succeeded in having his property registered; in any event, that case was concluded after the applicants submitted their applications to the Court and cannot therefore be regarded as relevant to the remedies which they should have sought (see, on this last point, among many others, Dimitar Yanakiev v. Bulgaria (no. 2), no. 50346/07, § 53 with further reference, 31 March 2016).

• EGMR, 08.06.2023 - 46530/09

  URGESI ET AUTRES c. ITALIE

  Celle-ci doit être bien établie et antérieure à la date d'introduction de la requête (Dimitar Yanakiev c. Bulgarie (no 2), no 50346/07, §§ 53 et 63, 31 mars 2016, Gherghina, décision précitée, § 88, et Sürmeli c. Allemagne [GC], no 75529/01, §§ 110-112, CEDH 2006-VII).
• EGMR, 11.02.2025 - 60220/16

  TOSUN AND OTHERS v. TÜRKIYE

  The decisions cited should in principle have been delivered before the application was lodged (Dimitar Yanakiev v. Bulgaria (no. 2), no. 50346/07, §§ 53 and 61, 31 March 2016, and Norbert Sikorski, cited above, § 115), and be relevant to the case at hand (Sakhnovskiy v. Russia [GC], no. 21272/03, §§ 43-44, 2 November 2010).
• EGMR, 20.01.2026 - 73776/14

  IOPPA v. UKRAINE + 3 other applications

  Such case-law must in principle be well established and date back to the period before the application was lodged (Dimitar Yanakiev v. Bulgaria (no. 2), no. 50346/07, § 53, 31 March 2016).
• EGMR, 11.02.2025 - 59481/16

  OLCAY AND OTHERS v. TÜRKIYE

  The decisions cited should in principle date back to the period before the application was lodged (see Dimitar Yanakiev v. Bulgaria (no. 2), no. 50346/07, §§ 53 and 61, 31 March 2016, and Norbert Sikorski, cited above, § 115), and be relevant to the case at hand (see Sakhnovskiy v. Russia [GC], no. 21272/03, §§ 43-44, 2 November 2010).
• EGMR, 13.07.2017 - 1849/08

  VELKOVA v. BULGARIA

  The relevant provisions governing the enforcement of final administrative court judgments under the Code of Administrative Procedure 2006 ("the 2006 Code") are summarised in Dimitar Yanakiev v. Bulgaria, no. 50346/07, 31 March 2016 and Stoyanov and Tabakov v. Bulgaria, no. 34130/04, §§ 53-57, 26 November 2013.
• EGMR, 09.12.2025 - 25466/20

  BURG OIL AD v. BULGARIA

  Rn. 14 The relevant provisions governing the enforcement of final administrative court judgments under the 2006 Code of Administrative Procedure (hereinafter "the 2006 Code") have been summarised in detail in Stoyanov and Tabakov v. Bulgaria (no. 34130/04, §§ 53-59, 26 November 2013) and Dimitar Yanakiev v. Bulgaria (no. 2) (no. 50346/07, §§ 30-37, 31 March 2016).
• EGMR, 27.02.2025 - 19274/20

  DZHANDZHGAVA v. CYPRUS

  Rn. 18 The Court notes first that Koretska is the only successful example of domestic case-law provided by the Government and most notably, that it was delivered after the present application was lodged with the Court (see, for example, Sürmeli v. Germany [GC], no. 75529/01, § 110, ECHR 2006-VII; Norbert Sikorski v. Poland, no. 17599/05, § 115, 22 October 2009; and Dimitar Yanakiev v. Bulgaria (no. 2), no. 50346/07, § 53, 31 March 2016).
• EGMR, 16.11.2021 - 73284/13

  STEFANOV v. BULGARIA
• EGMR, 13.10.2020 - 66993/13

  RASHEVA v. BULGARIA
• EGMR, 06.06.2019 - 1849/08

  VELKOVA AGAINST BULGARIA AND 3 OTHER CASES
• EGMR, 06.09.2018 - 2866/13

  UZUNOVA AND SEID v. BULGARIA
• EGMR, 19.07.2018 - 61432/11

  YORDANOVA AND OTHERS v. BULGARIA
• EGMR, 04.06.2020 - 48786/09

  AVENDI OOD v. BULGARIA
• EGMR, 19.01.2017 - 8725/07

  STAMOVA v. BULGARIA
• EGMR - 34706/18 (anhängig)

  TEYMURAZYAN v. ARMENIA
• EGMR, 25.09.2018 - 58043/10

  VLADIMIROV v. BULGARIA