Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  LULI AND OTHERS v. ALBANIA

  Art. 6, Art. 6 Abs. 1, Art. 35, Art. 41, Art. 46, Art. 46 Abs. 2 MRK
  Remainder inadmissible Violation of Article 6 - Right to a fair trial (Article 6 - Civil proceedings Article 6-1 - Reasonable time) Respondent State to take measures of a general character (Article 46-2 - Measures of a general character) Pecuniary damage - claim ...

Wird zitiert von ... (12)Neu Zitiert selbst (6)

• EGMR, 10.07.1984 - 8990/80

  GUINCHO c. PORTUGAL

  Auszug aus EGMR, 01.04.2014 - 64480/09

  The Court further notes that it has already found a breach of Article 6 § 1 of the Convention on account of the length of proceedings before one instance or level of jurisdiction (see, for example, Paulsen-Medalen and Svensson v. Sweden, 19 February 1998, §§ 38-42, Reports of Judgments and Decisions 1998-I; Bunkate v. the Netherlands, 26 May 1993, §§ 22-23, Series A no. 248-B; Abdoella v. the Netherlands, 25 November 1992, §§ 18-25, Series A no. 248-A; Zimmermann and Steiner v. Switzerland, 13 July 1983, § 32, Series A no. 66; and, Guincho v. Portugal, 10 July 1984, § 41, Series A no. 81).
• EGMR, 13.07.1983 - 8737/79

  Zimmermann und Steiner ./. Schweiz

  Auszug aus EGMR, 01.04.2014 - 64480/09

  The Court further notes that it has already found a breach of Article 6 § 1 of the Convention on account of the length of proceedings before one instance or level of jurisdiction (see, for example, Paulsen-Medalen and Svensson v. Sweden, 19 February 1998, §§ 38-42, Reports of Judgments and Decisions 1998-I; Bunkate v. the Netherlands, 26 May 1993, §§ 22-23, Series A no. 248-B; Abdoella v. the Netherlands, 25 November 1992, §§ 18-25, Series A no. 248-A; Zimmermann and Steiner v. Switzerland, 13 July 1983, § 32, Series A no. 66; and, Guincho v. Portugal, 10 July 1984, § 41, Series A no. 81).
• EGMR, 19.04.2007 - 63235/00

  VILHO ESKELINEN AND OTHERS v. FINLAND

  Auszug aus EGMR, 01.04.2014 - 64480/09

  On the latter point, what was at stake for the applicant has also to be taken into account (see, amongst others, Vilho Eskelinen and Others v. Finland [GC], no. 63235/00, § 67, ECHR 2007-II).

 
• EGMR, 28.07.1999 - 34256/96

  DI MAURO c. ITALIE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 01.04.2014 - 64480/09

  Furthermore, once a deficiency in the legal system has been identified by the Court, the national authorities have the task, subject to supervision by the Committee of Ministers, of taking within a determined period of time - retrospectively if needs be - the necessary measures of redress in accordance with the principle of subsidiarity under the Convention, so that the Court does not have to reiterate its finding of a violation in a long series of comparable cases (see, among other authorities, Scordino v. Italy (no. 1) [GC], no. 36813/97, § 233, ECHR 2006; Xenides-Arestis v. Turkey, no. 46347/99, §§ 39, 40, 22 December 2005; Broniowski v. Poland [GC], no. 31443/96, § 192, ECHR 2004-V; Bottazzi v. Italy [GC], no. 34884/97, § 22, ECHR 1999-V; and Di Mauro v. Italy [GC], no. 34256/96, § 23, ECHR 1999-V).
• EGMR, 28.07.1999 - 34884/97

  BOTTAZZI c. ITALIE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 01.04.2014 - 64480/09

  Furthermore, once a deficiency in the legal system has been identified by the Court, the national authorities have the task, subject to supervision by the Committee of Ministers, of taking within a determined period of time - retrospectively if needs be - the necessary measures of redress in accordance with the principle of subsidiarity under the Convention, so that the Court does not have to reiterate its finding of a violation in a long series of comparable cases (see, among other authorities, Scordino v. Italy (no. 1) [GC], no. 36813/97, § 233, ECHR 2006; Xenides-Arestis v. Turkey, no. 46347/99, §§ 39, 40, 22 December 2005; Broniowski v. Poland [GC], no. 31443/96, § 192, ECHR 2004-V; Bottazzi v. Italy [GC], no. 34884/97, § 22, ECHR 1999-V; and Di Mauro v. Italy [GC], no. 34256/96, § 23, ECHR 1999-V).
• EGMR, 10.07.2002 - 39794/98

  GRATZINGER ET GRATZINGEROVA c. REPUBLIQUE TCHEQUE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 01.04.2014 - 64480/09

  No final decision having been taken, it cannot be said that the applicants have "existing possessions" within the meaning of Article 1 of Protocol No. 1. The belief that, in the future, the authorities may issue a decision recognising the applicants" inherited property rights cannot be regarded as a form of "legitimate expectation" for the purposes of Article 1 of Protocol No. 1. The Court recalls that there is a difference between a mere hope of restitution, however understandable that hope may be, and a legitimate expectation, which must be of a more concrete nature than a mere hope and be based on a legal provision or a legal act such as a judicial decision (see Kopecký, cited above, § 49; and Gratzinger and Gratzingerova v. the Czech Republic (dec.), no. 39794/98, § 73, ECHR 2002-VII ).

• EGMR, 05.03.2024 - 7564/07

  JELLA AND OTHERS v. ALBANIA

  64480/09 and 5 others, § 104, 1 April 2014).
• EGMR, 11.01.2018 - 10613/16

  SHARXHI AND OTHERS v. ALBANIA

  Moreover, referring to the cases of Gjyli v. Albania (no. 32907/07, §§ 55-61, 29 September 2009), Manushaqe Puto and Others v. Albania (nos. 604/07 and 3 others, §§ 33-35, 31 July 2012) and Luli and Others v. Albania (nos. 64480/09 and 5 others, §§ 77-84, and §§ 114-119, 1 April 2014), the Court finds that there was no effective remedy in Albania in respect of the non-enforcement of final decisions and length of proceedings at the material time.
• EGMR, 30.01.2024 - 22493/12

  KOKALARI v. ALBANIA

  64480/09 and 5 others, §§ 20-21, 84 and 89, 1 April 2014).

 
• EGMR, 22.02.2024 - 31018/09

  VICKTORIA SH.P.K. v. ALBANIA

  64480/09 and 5 others, 1 April 2014, and Mishgjoni, cited above, the Court already found a violation in respect of issues similar to those in the present case.
• EGMR, 05.03.2024 - 31011/09

  ILIRIA S.R.L. v. ALBANIA

  A further delay of almost three years occurred between the Tirana Court of Appeal decision of 31 March 2009 and the Supreme Court decision of 12 April 2012 (see paragraphs 13 - 14 above and Luli and Others v. Albania, nos. 64480/09 and 5 others, § 95, 1 April 2014).
• EGMR, 09.11.2023 - 18175/12

  CEPIKU AND SENI SH.P.K. v. ALBANIA

  The Court has established clear and extensive case-law concerning complaints relating to the excessive length of civil proceedings (see, for example, Luli and Others v. Albania, nos. 64480/09 and 5 others, 1 April 2014, and Mishgjoni v. Albania, no. 18381/05, 7 December 2010).
• EGMR, 14.09.2023 - 13523/16

  CITOZI AND OTHERS v. ALBANIA

  The Court has established clear and extensive case-law concerning complaints relating to the excessive length of civil proceedings (see, for example, Luli and Others v. Albania, nos. 64480/09 and 5 others, 1 April 2014, and Mishgjoni v. Albania, no. 18381/05, 7 December 2010).
• EGMR, 14.09.2023 - 50783/12

  ZHIVANI v. ALBANIA

  The Court has established clear and extensive case-law concerning complaints relating to the excessive length of civil proceedings (see, for example, Luli and Others v. Albania, nos. 64480/09 and 5 others, 1 April 2014, and Mishgjoni v. Albania, no. 18381/05, 7 December 2010).
• EGMR, 31.08.2023 - 52062/16

  RRAPAJ v. ALBANIA

  The Court has established clear and extensive case-law concerning complaints relating to the excessive length of civil proceedings (see, for example, Luli and Others v. Albania, nos. 64480/09 and 5 others, 1 April 2014, and Mishgjoni v. Albania, no. 18381/05, 7 December 2010).
• EGMR - 32645/16 (anhängig)

  ÇINI AND OTHERS v. ALBANIA

  64480/09 and 5 others, § 79, 1 April 2014)? In particular, were the applicants required to lodge an action under Article 399/1 et seqq.
• EGMR, 07.10.2021 - 47401/15

  NELA v. ALBANIA
• EGMR - 62421/11 (anhängig)

  DERVISHI v. ALBANIA