Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  MILOJEVIC AND OTHERS v. SERBIA

  Art. 6, Art. 6 Abs. 1, Art. 6 Abs. 2, Art. 8, Art. 35 MRK
  Partly inadmissible (englisch)

Verfahrensgang

• EGMR, 03.09.2013 - 43519/07, 43524/07, 45247/07
• EGMR, 12.01.2016 - 43519/07
• EGMR, 15.03.2018 - 43519/07

Wird zitiert von ... (0)Neu Zitiert selbst (11)

• EGMR, 10.10.2000 - 42095/98

  DAKTARAS c. LITUANIE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 03.09.2013 - 43519/07

  It suffices, even in the absence of any formal finding, that there is some reasoning to suggest that the official regards that person as guilty (see Allen, cited above, § 126; Daktaras v. Lithuania, no. 42095/98, § 41, ECHR 2000-X and A.L. v. Germany, no. 72758/01, § 31, 28 April 2005).
• EGMR, 11.02.2003 - 56568/00

  Y c. NORVEGE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 03.09.2013 - 43519/07

  Where criminal proceedings end with the 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 (see Allen, cited above, §§ 99-102 and § 104; Y v. Norway, no. 56568/00, § 39, ECHR 2003-II (extracts); Ringvold v. Norway, no. 34964/97, § 41, ECHR 2003-II; Moullet v. France (no. 2) (dec.), no. 27521/04, CEDH 2007-X).
• EGMR, 28.04.2005 - 72758/01

  Unschuldsvermutung (Entschädigungsansprüche; konkludente Schuldfeststellung bei …

  Auszug aus EGMR, 03.09.2013 - 43519/07

  It suffices, even in the absence of any formal finding, that there is some reasoning to suggest that the official regards that person as guilty (see Allen, cited above, § 126; Daktaras v. Lithuania, no. 42095/98, § 41, ECHR 2000-X and A.L. v. Germany, no. 72758/01, § 31, 28 April 2005).

 
• EGMR, 18.07.2006 - 6924/02

  JAKUMAS v. LITHUANIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 03.09.2013 - 43519/07

  The only basis on which the present applicants can bring a complaint about a breach of the presumption of innocence in relation to their dismissal is by alleging that official statements in the context of the dismissal proceedings and the subsequent civil proceedings amounted to an unequivocal declaration of their guilt which could have prejudged the subsequent assessment of the charges against them in the context of the ensuing criminal proceedings or cast doubt on the correctness of their acquittal once the criminal proceedings were finalised without a guilty verdict (see, mutatis mutandis, Jakumas v. Lithuania, no. 6924/02, § 57, 18 July 2006 and Y v. Norway, cited above, § 46).
• EGMR, 15.07.2010 - 9143/08

  SIKIC v. CROATIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 03.09.2013 - 43519/07

  It is the established practice of the Court that the proceedings on person's dismissal from public service can fall within the ambit of Article 6 § 2 if the above conditions are met (see Allen, cited above, § 98; Sikic v. Croatia, no. 9143/08, 15 July 2010; Çelik (Bozkurt) v. Turkey, no. 34388/05, 12 April 2011 and Vanjak v. Croatia, no. 29889/04, 14 January 2010).
• EGMR, 12.04.2011 - 34388/05

  CELIK (BOZKURT) v. TURKEY

  Auszug aus EGMR, 03.09.2013 - 43519/07

  It is the established practice of the Court that the proceedings on person's dismissal from public service can fall within the ambit of Article 6 § 2 if the above conditions are met (see Allen, cited above, § 98; Sikic v. Croatia, no. 9143/08, 15 July 2010; Çelik (Bozkurt) v. Turkey, no. 34388/05, 12 April 2011 and Vanjak v. Croatia, no. 29889/04, 14 January 2010).
• EGMR, 02.10.2012 - 61213/08

  MATOS DINIS c. PORTUGAL

  Auszug aus EGMR, 03.09.2013 - 43519/07

  Such link is considered to exist when the issues raised in these proceedings are a consequence and the concomitant of the criminal proceedings concerned, in which the applicant was the "accused" (see Allen, cited above, §§ 99-100; Moullet v. France (no. 2), cited above; Matos Dinis v. Portugal, (dec.), no. 61213/08, § 35, 2 October 2012).
• EGMR, 12.07.2013 - 25424/09

  ALLEN c. ROYAUME-UNI

  Auszug aus EGMR, 03.09.2013 - 43519/07

  According to its established case-law there are three criteria to be taken into account when deciding whether a person was "charged with a criminal offence" for the purposes of Article 6, namely the classification of the proceedings under national law, their essential nature and the type and severity of the penalty that the applicant risked incurring (see Allen v. the United Kingdom, no. 25424/09 [GC], § 95, 12 July 2013; Phillips v. the United Kingdom, no. 41087/98, § 31; A.P., M.P. and T.P. v. Switzerland, judgment of 29 August 1997, Reports of Judgments and Decisions 1997-V, § 39).
• EGMR, 25.08.1993 - 13126/87

  SEKANINA c. AUTRICHE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 03.09.2013 - 43519/07

  Moreover, the scope of Article 6 § 2 of the Convention is not limited to pending, discontinued or completed criminal proceedings that resulted in the acquittal (see Allen, cited above, § 94; Allenet de Ribemont v. France, 10 February 1995, § 35, Series A no. 308; Minelli v. Switzerland, 25 March 1983, Series A no. 62 and Sekanina v. Austria, 25 August 1993, Series A no. 266-A).
• EGMR, 10.02.1995 - 15175/89

  ALLENET DE RIBEMONT c. FRANCE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 03.09.2013 - 43519/07

  Moreover, the scope of Article 6 § 2 of the Convention is not limited to pending, discontinued or completed criminal proceedings that resulted in the acquittal (see Allen, cited above, § 94; Allenet de Ribemont v. France, 10 February 1995, § 35, Series A no. 308; Minelli v. Switzerland, 25 March 1983, Series A no. 62 and Sekanina v. Austria, 25 August 1993, Series A no. 266-A).
• EGMR, 25.03.1983 - 8660/79

  Minelli ./. Schweiz