Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  YILDIZ v. TURKEY

  Inadmissible (englisch)

Wird zitiert von ... (3)Zitiert selbst (5)

alle Zitatstellen anzeigen
• EGMR, 12.07.2013 - 25424/09

  [ENG]

  Auszug aus EGMR, 24.01.2017 - 65182/10

  Viewed as a procedural guarantee in the context of a criminal trial, the presumption of innocence imposes requirements in respect of, inter alia, the burden of proof, legal presumptions of fact and law, privilege against self-incrimination, pre-trial publicity and premature expressions, by the trial court or by other public officials, of a defendant's guilt (see Allen v. the United Kingdom [GC], no. 25424/09, § 93, ECHR 2013 and the cases cited therein for a summary of the case-law).
• EGMR, 18.10.2016 - 21107/07

  ALKASIBENLI v. TURKEY

  Auszug aus EGMR, 24.01.2017 - 65182/10

  Such a link is likely to be present, for example, where the subsequent proceedings require examination of the outcome of the prior criminal proceedings and, in particular, where they oblige the court to analyse the criminal judgment, to engage in a review or evaluation of the evidence in the criminal file, to assess the applicant's participation in some or all of the events leading to the criminal charge, or to comment on the subsisting indications of the applicant's possible guilt (see Alkaşı v. Turkey, no. 21107/07, § 25, 18 October 2016, and Allen, cited above, § 104).
• EGMR, 11.02.2003 - 56568/00

  Y c. NORVEGE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 24.01.2017 - 65182/10

  Where criminal proceedings end with acquittal, the lack of a person's criminal conviction shall, in compliance with the principle of the presumption of innocence, be preserved in any other proceedings of whatever nature, provided that such proceedings were linked to the criminal trial in such a way as to fall within the scope of Article 6 § 2 (ibid., §§ 99-102 and § 104; see also Y v. Norway, no. 56568/00, § 39, ECHR 2003-II (extracts); Ringvold v. Norway, no. 34964/97, § 41, ECHR 2003-II; and Moullet v. France (no. 2) (dec.), no. 27521/04, CEDH 2007-X).
• EGMR, 13.09.2016 - 64735/14

  BIAGIOLI v. SAN MARINO

  Auszug aus EGMR, 24.01.2017 - 65182/10

  The Court recalls that disciplinary proceedings in which the right to continue to exercise a profession is at stake give rise to "contestations" (disputes) over civil rights within the meaning of Article 6 § 1 (see Biagioli v. San Marino (dec.), 64735/14, 13 September 2016 and the cases cited therein).
• EGMR, 08.01.2004 - 44998/98

  A. v. FINLAND

  Auszug aus EGMR, 24.01.2017 - 65182/10

  In that connection, the Court reiterates that the procedural guarantees of Article 6 § 1 apply to all litigants falling into this category and not only those who have not avoided a sanction interfering with their right to continue practising their profession (see A. v. Finland (dec.), 44998/98, 8 January 2004).

alle Zitatstellen anzeigen
• EGMR, 11.06.2024 - 32483/19

  NEALON v. THE UNITED KINGDOM and 1 other application

  More recently, the Court has found that an applicant's request to lift an interim order that he leave the family home was not a sequel to the criminal proceedings against him relating to the sexual abuse of his daughter (see Kaiser v. Austria, (dec.), no. 15706/08, 13 December 2016, with further references, notably to Allen, cited above, § 104, and O.L. v. Finland); that Article 6 § 2 of the Convention was not applicable in its second aspect to an unsatisfactory appraisal following an acquittal of charges of bribery, where the language used in the appraisal was restricted to the applicant's professional conduct and did not refer, comment on or otherwise question the outcome of the criminal proceedings which had been brought against him (see Yildiz v. Turkey, (dec.), no. 65182/10, 24 January 2017); and that the necessary link had not been established between discontinued criminal proceedings against persons suspected of membership of terrorist organisations, who were allegedly killed in terrorist attacks, and their relatives' claims for additional compensation payable to victims of terrorism (see Martinez Agirre and Others v. Spain, (dec.), nos.
• Generalanwalt beim EuGH, 04.09.2025 - C-312/24

  Darashev - Vorlage zur Vorabentscheidung - Schutz natürlicher Personen bei der …

  {FN:35} Für einen Überblick über diese Rechtsprechung vgl. EGMR, Große Kammer, 11. Juni 2024, Nealon und Hallam/Vereinigtes Königreich, CE:ECHR:2024:0611JUD003248319, §§ 102 bis 109 und 122 bis 125, sowie speziell im Bereich des öffentlichen Dienstes EGMR, 16. Februar 2017, Yildiz/Türkei (CE:ECHR:2017:0124DEC006518210, §§ 30 bis 34).
• EGMR, 23.05.2017 - 79821/12

  MARUSIC v. CROATIA

  Accordingly, in this connection Article 6 cannot come into play (compare Yıldız v. Turkey (dec.), no. 65182/10, § 39, 24 January 2017).