Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  ADZIC v. CROATIA (No. 2)

  Violation of Article 6 - Right to a fair trial (Article 6 - Civil proceedings;Article 6-1 - Public hearing);Violation of Article 8 - Right to respect for private and family life (Article 8-1 - Respect for family life) (englisch)

Sonstiges

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte (Verfahrensmitteilung)

  ADZIC v. CROATIA (NO. 2)

  Art. 6, Art. 6 Abs. 1, Art. 8, Art. 8 Abs. 1 MRK
  [ENG]

Wird zitiert von ... (3)Neu Zitiert selbst (2)

• EGMR, 03.09.2015 - 10161/13

  M. AND M. v. CROATIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 02.05.2019 - 19601/16

  Whilst Article 8 contains no explicit procedural requirements, the decision-making process must be fair and such as to afford due respect to the interests safeguarded by Article 8 (see, for example, M. and M. v. Croatia, no. 10161/13, § 180, ECHR 2015 (extracts)).
• EGMR, 20.03.2018 - 37685/10

  RADOMILJA AND OTHERS v. CROATIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 02.05.2019 - 19601/16

  Being master of the characterisation to be given in law to the facts of the case (see Guerra and Others v. Italy, 19 February 1998, § 44, Reports of Judgments and Decisions 1998-I; and Radomilja and Others v. Croatia [GC], nos. 37685/10 and 22768/12, § 124, 20 March 2018), and having regard to its case-law (see, for example, Buscemi v. Italy, no. 29569/95, §§ 57-63, ECHR 1999-VI), the Court finds that the applicant's remaining complaint under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention, concerning the breach of the adversarial principle and the principle of equality of arms (see paragraph 31 above), should be examined under Article 8 thereof (see paragraphs 70-96 below).

• EGMR, 23.01.2024 - 3000/16

  BELJIC AND OTHERS v. SERBIA

  The Court, being the master of the characterisation to be given in law to the facts of any case before it (see Radomilja and Others v. Croatia [GC], nos. 37685/10 and 22768/12, § 126, 20 March 2018), considers that all the issues raised by the applicants in this context fall to be examined under Article 8 of the Convention (see, mutatis mutandis, Ad?¾ic v. Croatia (no. 2), no. 19601/16, §§ 68-69, 2 May 2019).
• EGMR, 01.09.2022 - 21347/21

  Z. v. CROATIA

  That decision amounted to an interference with the applicant's right to respect for his family life (see Vladimir Ushakov, cited above, § 87, and Ad?¾ic v. Croatia (no. 2), no. 19601/16, § 79, 2 May 2019 and the cases cited therein), it being understood that the mutual enjoyment by a parent and a child of each other's company constitutes a fundamental element of family life protected under Article 8 of the Convention (ibid.).
• EGMR, 07.04.2022 - 13344/20

  A.L. c. FRANCE

  Renvoyant aux paragraphes 65 et 66 ci-dessus, la Cour souligne que ce constat de violation ne saurait être interprété comme mettant en cause l'appréciation de la cour d'appel de Rouen de l'intérêt supérieur de l'enfant S. et sa décision de rejeter les demandes du requérant, confirmées par la Cour de cassation (comparer mutatis mutandis avec, par exemple, M.V. c. Pologne, no 16202/14, § 82, 1er avril 2021, Ad?¾ic c. Croatie (no 2), no 19601/16, §§ 95-96, 2 mai 2019 et E.S. c. Roumanie et Bulgarie, no 60281/11, § 82, 19 juillet 2016).