Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  KAUCZOR v. POLAND

  Art. 5, Art. 5 Abs. 3, Art. 6, Art. 6 Abs. 1, Art. 41, Art. 46, Art. 46 Abs. 2 MRK
  Violation of Art. 5-3 Violation of Art. 6-1 Pecuniary damage - claim dismissed Non-pecuniary damage - award (englisch)

Wird zitiert von ... (21)Neu Zitiert selbst (5)

• EGMR, 26.10.2000 - 30210/96

  Das Recht auf Verfahrensbeschleunigung gemäß Art. 6 Abs. 1 S. 1 EMRK in …

  Auszug aus EGMR, 03.02.2009 - 45219/06

  The Court reiterates that the general principles regarding the right "to trial within a reasonable time or to release pending trial, as guaranteed by Article 5 § 3 of the Convention, have been stated in a number of its previous judgements (see, among many other authorities, Kudla v. Poland [GC], no. 30210/96, § 110 et seq., ECHR 2000-XI; and McKay v. the United Kingdom [GC], no. 543/03, §§ 41-44, ECHR 2006-..., with further references).
• EGMR, 13.07.2000 - 39221/98

  SCOZZARI ET GIUNTA c. ITALIE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 03.02.2009 - 45219/06

  The respondent State remains free, subject to monitoring by the Committee of Ministers, to choose the means by which it will discharge its legal obligation under Article 46 of the Convention, provided that such means are compatible with the conclusions set out in the Court's judgment (see Scozzari and Giunta v. Italy [GC], nos. 39221/98 and 41963/98, § 249, ECHR 2000-VIII, and Broniowski v. Poland cited above).
• EGMR, 27.06.2000 - 30979/96

  FRYDLENDER c. FRANCE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 03.02.2009 - 45219/06

  The Court reiterates that the reasonableness of the length of proceedings must be assessed in the light of the circumstances of the case and with reference to the following criteria: the complexity of the case, the conduct of the applicant and the relevant authorities and what was at stake for the applicant in the dispute (see, among many other authorities, Frydlender v. France [GC], no. 30979/96, § 43, ECHR 2000-VII).
• EGMR, 28.07.1999 - 34884/97

  BOTTAZZI c. ITALIE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 03.02.2009 - 45219/06

  The Court thus concludes, as the Committee of Ministers did, that for many years, at least as recently as in 2007, numerous cases have demonstrated that the excessive length of pre-trial detention in Poland reveals a structural problem consisting of "a practice that is incompatible with the Convention" (see mutatis mutandis Broniowski v. Poland [GC], no. 31443/96, §§ 190-191, ECHR 2004-V; Scordino v. Italy (no. 1) [GC], no. 36813/97, §§ 229-231, ECHR 2006-...; Bottazzi v. Italy [GC], no. 34884/97, § 22, ECHR 1999-V with respect to the Italian length of proceedings cases).
• EGMR, 01.03.2005 - 15212/03

  CHARZYNSKI c. POLOGNE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 03.02.2009 - 45219/06

  The relevant domestic law and practice concerning remedies for excessive length of judicial proceedings, in particular the applicable provisions of the 2004 Act, are stated in the Court's decisions in the cases of Charzynski v. Poland no. 15212/03 (dec.), §§ 12-23, ECHR 2005-V and Ratajczyk v. Poland no. 11215/02 (dec.), ECHR 2005-VIII, and its judgment in the case of Krasuski v. Poland, no. 61444/00, §§ 34-46, ECHR 2005-V.

• EGMR, 17.09.2009 - 13936/02

  MANOLE ET AUTRES c. MOLDOVA

  L'Etat défendeur reste libre, sous le contrôle du Comité des Ministres, de choisir les moyens de s'acquitter de son obligation juridique au regard de l'article 46 de la Convention, pour autant que ces moyens soient compatibles avec les conclusions contenues dans l'arrêt de la Cour (Scozzari et Giunta c. Italie [GC], nos 39221/98 et 41963/98, § 249, CEDH 2000-VIII ; Brumarescu c. Roumanie (satisfaction équitable) [GC], no 28342/95, § 20, CEDH 2001-I ; Kauczor c. Pologne, no 45219/06, § 61, 3 février 2009).
• EGMR, 04.10.2016 - 2235/02

  KLIBISZ v. POLAND

  The Court has also addressed, in numerous cases, its practice concerning complaints under Article 5 § 3 of the Convention about the length of pre-trial detention (see Kauczor v. Poland, no. 45219/06, 3 February 2009 with further references) and under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention about the violation of one's right to a hearing within a reasonable time (see, for example, Frydlender v. France [GC], no. 30979/96, § 43, ECHR 2000-VII; Cocchiarella v. Italy [GC], no. 64886/01, §§ 69-98, ECHR 2006-V; Majewski v. Poland, no. 52690/99, 11 October 2005; and Wende and Kukówka v. Poland, no. 56026/00, 10 May 2007).
• EGMR, 18.01.2024 - 42770/21

  MERO?ƒ v. POLAND

  In the leading cases of Kauczor v. Poland, no. 45219/06, 3 February 2009, and Celejewski v. Poland, no. 17584/04, 4 May 2006, the Court already found a violation in respect of issues similar to those in the present case.

 
• EGMR, 30.11.2023 - 14630/22

  MARIA?ƒSKI v. POLAND

  In the leading cases of Kauczor v. Poland, no. 45219/06, 3 February 2009 and Celejewski v. Poland, no. 17584/04, 4 May 2006, the Court already found a violation in respect of issues similar to those in the present case.
• EGMR, 16.06.2022 - 12113/19

  KUCEWICZ v. POLAND

  The Court has established clear and extensive case-law concerning complaints relating to the length of a pre-trial detention (see, for example, Kauczor v. Poland, no. 45219/06, 3 February 2009).
• EGMR, 12.10.2023 - 19187/21

  ROSENOWSKI v. POLAND

  The Court has established clear and extensive case-law concerning complaints relating to the excessive length of pre-trial detention (see, for example, Kauczor v. Poland, no. 45219/06, 3 February 2009 and Celejewski v. Poland, no. 17584/04, 4 May 2006).
• EGMR, 30.11.2021 - 568/19

  MYSLIWIEC v. POLAND

  Relevant domestic law and practice Detention on remand and other preventive measures 28. The relevant domestic law and practice concerning detention on remand (tymczasowe aresztowanie), the grounds for its extension, release from detention and rules governing other so-called "preventive measures" (srodki zapobiegawcze) are set out in Golek v. Poland (no. 31330/02, §§ 27-33, 25 April 2006), Celejewski v. Poland (no. 17584/04, §§ 22-23, 4 May 2006), and Kauczor v. Poland (no. 45219/06, §§ 25-33, 3 February 2009).
• EGMR, 18.10.2018 - 15333/16

  BURZA v. POLAND

  The relevant domestic law and practice concerning the imposition of pre-trial detention (aresztowanie tymczasowe), the grounds for its extension, release from detention and rules governing other "preventive measures" (srodki zapobiegawcze) are stated in the Court's judgments in the cases of Golek v. Poland (no. 31330/02, §§ 27-33, 25 April 2006) and, most recently, Kauczor v. Poland (no. 45219/06, §§ 26-27, 3 February 2009).
• EGMR, 27.01.2015 - 7068/11

  POWALKA v. POLAND

  The Court has established in a number of cases, including those brought against Poland, its practice concerning complaints of a violation of Article 5 § 3 of the Convention as regards the unreasonable length of pre-trial detention (Kauczor v. Poland, no. 45219/06, 3 February 2009 with further references).
• EGMR, 04.11.2014 - 44034/11

  KACKI v. POLAND

  The Court has established in a number of cases, including those brought against Poland, its practice concerning complaints under Article 5 § 3 of the Convention about the length of pre-trial detention (see Kauczor v. Poland, no. 45219/06, 3 February 2009 with further references).
• EGMR, 21.02.2012 - 36321/08

  SOLOBODOWSKI v. POLAND
• EGMR, 03.05.2011 - 53524/08

  CZUBERNAT v. POLAND
• EGMR, 02.11.2010 - 45747/08

  OTTO v. POLAND
• EGMR, 12.01.2010 - 18346/08

  PEPLOWSKI v. POLAND
• EGMR, 12.01.2010 - 18765/08

  JACEK WASIAK v. POLAND
• EGMR, 12.01.2010 - 4235/07

  BURZYNSKI c. POLOGNE
• EGMR, 13.10.2009 - 1232/08

  SZYMCZYK v. POLAND
• EGMR, 29.09.2009 - 31488/07

  GORAL v. POLAND
• EGMR, 29.09.2009 - 39150/06

  DAAB v. POLAND
• EGMR, 23.06.2009 - 35074/03

  MATUSZCZYK v. POLAND
• EGMR, 03.02.2022 - 22647/19

  RUDNICKI v. POLAND