Rechtsprechung
EGMR, 01.06.2017 - 61503/14, 61673/14, 64583/14 |
Zitiervorschläge
Tipp: Um den Kurzlink (hier: https://dejure.org/2017,17345) schnell in die Zwischenablage zu kopieren, können Sie die Tastenkombination Alt + R verwenden - auch ohne diesen Bereich zu öffnen.
Volltextveröffentlichungen (3)
- Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte
J.M. AND OTHERS v. AUSTRIA
No violation of Article 6 - Right to a fair trial (Article 6 - Criminal proceedings;Article 6-1 - Fair hearing;Equality of arms;Article 6-3-d - Examination of witnesses) (englisch)
- Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte
J. M. AND OTHERS v. AUSTRIA - [Deutsche Übersetzung] Zusammenfassung durch das Österreichische Institut für Menschenrechte (ÖIM)
[DEU] No violation of Article 6 - Right to a fair trial (Article 6 - Criminal proceedings;Article 6-1 - Fair hearing;Equality of arms;Article 6-3-d - Examination of witnesses)
- juris(Abodienst) (Volltext/Leitsatz)
Sonstiges
- Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte (Verfahrensmitteilung)
J.M. v. AUSTRIA
Wird zitiert von ... (0) Neu Zitiert selbst (5)
- EGMR, 18.02.2009 - 55707/00
Andrejeva ./. Lettland
Auszug aus EGMR, 01.06.2017 - 61503/14
The principle of equality of arms, one of the elements of the broader concept of a "fair hearing" within the meaning of Article 6 § 1 of the Convention, requires that each party must be afforded a reasonable opportunity to present his or her case under conditions that do not place him at a substantial disadvantage vis-à-vis his opponent or opponents (see Avotins v. Latvia [GC], no. 17502/07, § 119, ECHR 2016; Andrejeva v. Latvia [GC], no. 55707/00, § 96, ECHR 2009 with further references). - EGMR, 16.12.1992 - 13071/87
EDWARDS c. ROYAUME-UNI
Auszug aus EGMR, 01.06.2017 - 61503/14
The Court further reiterates that the Contracting States enjoy considerable freedom in the choice of the means calculated to ensure that their judicial systems are in compliance with the requirements of Article 6. Its primary concern under Article 6 § 1 is to evaluate the "overall fairness" of the criminal proceedings (see, for example, Schatschaschwili, cited above, § 101; Taxquet, cited above, § 84; Edwards v. the United Kingdom, 16 December 1992, § 34, Series A no. 247-B). - EGMR, 10.08.2006 - 75737/01
Recht auf ein faires Verfahren (Unabhängigkeit und Unparteilichkeit der Richter …
Auszug aus EGMR, 01.06.2017 - 61503/14
Instead, it must confine itself, as far as possible, to examining the issues raised by the case before it (see, among many authorities, Schwarzenberger v. Germany, no. 75737/01, § 37, 10 August 2006; Schatschaschwili, cited above, § 109; Taxquet v. Belgium [GC], no. 926/05, § 83, ECHR 2010). - EGMR, 28.08.1991 - 11170/84
Brandstetter ./. Österreich
Auszug aus EGMR, 01.06.2017 - 61503/14
Citing the Court's case-law (Brandstetter v. Austria, 28 August 1991, Series A no. 211; Bönisch v. Austria, 6 May 1985, Series A no. 92; and C.B. v. Austria, no. 30465/06, 4 April 2013), the Supreme Court found that the applicants had had sufficient opportunities to question F.S. during the hearing of 9 August 2012. - EGMR, 06.05.1985 - 8658/79
Bönisch ./. Österreich
Auszug aus EGMR, 01.06.2017 - 61503/14
Citing the Court's case-law (Brandstetter v. Austria, 28 August 1991, Series A no. 211; Bönisch v. Austria, 6 May 1985, Series A no. 92; and C.B. v. Austria, no. 30465/06, 4 April 2013), the Supreme Court found that the applicants had had sufficient opportunities to question F.S. during the hearing of 9 August 2012.