Rechtsprechung
   EGMR, 04.05.2006 - 70786/01   

Zitiervorschläge
https://dejure.org/2006,71047
EGMR, 04.05.2006 - 70786/01 (https://dejure.org/2006,71047)
EGMR, Entscheidung vom 04.05.2006 - 70786/01 (https://dejure.org/2006,71047)
EGMR, Entscheidung vom 04. Mai 2006 - 70786/01 (https://dejure.org/2006,71047)
Tipp: Um den Kurzlink (hier: https://dejure.org/2006,71047) schnell in die Zwischenablage zu kopieren, können Sie die Tastenkombination Alt + R verwenden - auch ohne diesen Bereich zu öffnen.

Volltextveröffentlichung

  • Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

    ROSENGREN v. ROMANIA

    Art. 5, Art. 5 Abs. 1 Buchst. c, Art. 5 Abs. 3, Art. 5 Abs. 4, Art. 5 Abs. 5, Art. 3, Art. 8, Art. 10, Art. 6, Art. 6 Abs. 1, Art. 6 Abs. 2, Protokoll Nr. 1 Art. 1, Protokoll Nr. ... 4 Art. 2, Protokoll Nr. 4 Art. 2 Abs. 1, Protokoll Nr. 4 Art. 2 Abs. 2, Protokoll Nr. 4 Art. 3, Protokoll Nr. 4 Art. 3 Abs. 1 MRK
    Partly admissible Partly inadmissible (englisch)

Verfahrensgang

 
Sortierung



Kontextvorschau





Hinweis: Klicken Sie auf das Sprechblasensymbol, um eine Kontextvorschau im Fließtext zu sehen. Um alle zu sehen, genügt ein Doppelklick.

Wird zitiert von ... (0)Neu Zitiert selbst (8)

  • EGMR, 28.07.1999 - 25803/94

    Zur "Einzelfallprüfung" und "geltungszeitlichen Interpretation" im Rahmen des

    Auszug aus EGMR, 04.05.2006 - 70786/01
    The Court recalls that the purpose of Article 35 § 1, which sets out the rule on exhaustion of domestic remedies, is to afford the Contracting States the opportunity of preventing or putting right the violations alleged against them before those allegations are submitted to the Court (see Selmouni v. France [GC], no. 25803/94, § 74, ECHR 1999-V, and Kudla v. Poland [GC], no. 30210/96, § 152, ECHR 2000-XI).
  • EGMR, 26.10.2000 - 30210/96

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

    Auszug aus EGMR, 04.05.2006 - 70786/01
    The Court recalls that the purpose of Article 35 § 1, which sets out the rule on exhaustion of domestic remedies, is to afford the Contracting States the opportunity of preventing or putting right the violations alleged against them before those allegations are submitted to the Court (see Selmouni v. France [GC], no. 25803/94, § 74, ECHR 1999-V, and Kudla v. Poland [GC], no. 30210/96, § 152, ECHR 2000-XI).
  • EGMR, 02.07.2002 - 53180/99

    GORIZDRA v. MOLDOVA

    Auszug aus EGMR, 04.05.2006 - 70786/01
    It is the Court's settled case-law that where the national authorities have found a violation and their decision constitutes appropriate and sufficient redress, the party concerned can no longer claim to be a victim within the meaning of Article 34 of the Convention (see Cataldo v. Italy (dec.), no. 45656/99, ECHR 2004-VI, and Gorizdra v. Moldova (dec.), no. 53180/99, 2 July 2002).
  • EGMR, 03.06.2004 - 45656/99

    CATALDO v. ITALY

    Auszug aus EGMR, 04.05.2006 - 70786/01
    It is the Court's settled case-law that where the national authorities have found a violation and their decision constitutes appropriate and sufficient redress, the party concerned can no longer claim to be a victim within the meaning of Article 34 of the Convention (see Cataldo v. Italy (dec.), no. 45656/99, ECHR 2004-VI, and Gorizdra v. Moldova (dec.), no. 53180/99, 2 July 2002).
  • EGMR, 16.12.1992 - 13071/87

    EDWARDS c. ROYAUME-UNI

    Auszug aus EGMR, 04.05.2006 - 70786/01
    The Court's task is to ascertain whether the proceedings in their entirety were fair (see Edwards v. the United Kingdom, judgment of 16 December 1992, Series A no. 247-B, pp. 34-35, § 34).
  • EGMR, 27.02.1980 - 6903/75

    DEWEER c. BELGIQUE

    Auszug aus EGMR, 04.05.2006 - 70786/01
    It suffices, even in the absence of any formal finding, that there is some reasoning suggesting that the court or the official regards the accused as guilty (see, among other authorities, Minelli v. Switzerland, judgment of 25 March 1983, Series A no. 62, p. 18, § 37, Böhmer v. Germany, no. 37568/97, § 54, judgment of 3.10.02, Deweer v. Belgium judgment of 27 February 1980, Series A no. 35, p. 30, § 56, and Allenet de Ribemont v. France, judgment of 10 February 1995, Series A no. 308, p. 16, §§ 35-36).
  • EGMR, 10.02.1995 - 15175/89

    ALLENET DE RIBEMONT c. FRANCE

    Auszug aus EGMR, 04.05.2006 - 70786/01
    It suffices, even in the absence of any formal finding, that there is some reasoning suggesting that the court or the official regards the accused as guilty (see, among other authorities, Minelli v. Switzerland, judgment of 25 March 1983, Series A no. 62, p. 18, § 37, Böhmer v. Germany, no. 37568/97, § 54, judgment of 3.10.02, Deweer v. Belgium judgment of 27 February 1980, Series A no. 35, p. 30, § 56, and Allenet de Ribemont v. France, judgment of 10 February 1995, Series A no. 308, p. 16, §§ 35-36).
  • EGMR, 25.03.1983 - 8660/79

    Minelli ./. Schweiz

    Auszug aus EGMR, 04.05.2006 - 70786/01
    It suffices, even in the absence of any formal finding, that there is some reasoning suggesting that the court or the official regards the accused as guilty (see, among other authorities, Minelli v. Switzerland, judgment of 25 March 1983, Series A no. 62, p. 18, § 37, Böhmer v. Germany, no. 37568/97, § 54, judgment of 3.10.02, Deweer v. Belgium judgment of 27 February 1980, Series A no. 35, p. 30, § 56, and Allenet de Ribemont v. France, judgment of 10 February 1995, Series A no. 308, p. 16, §§ 35-36).
Haben Sie eine Ergänzung? Oder haben Sie einen Fehler gefunden? Schreiben Sie uns.
Sie können auswählen (Maus oder Pfeiltasten):
(Liste aufgrund Ihrer bisherigen Eingabe)
Komplette Übersicht