Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  MADZAROVIC AND OTHERS v. MONTENEGRO

  Violation of Article 6 - Right to a fair trial (Article 6 - Civil proceedings;Article 6-1 - Access to court) (englisch)

Sonstiges

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte (Verfahrensmitteilung)

  MADZAROVIC AND OTHERS v. MONTENEGRO and 1 other application

  Art. 6, Art. 6 Abs. 1, Art. 13, Protokoll Nr. 1 Art. 1 MRK
  [ENG]

Wird zitiert von ... (0)Neu Zitiert selbst (7)

• EGMR, 21.02.1975 - 4451/70

  GOLDER c. ROYAUME-UNI

  Auszug aus EGMR, 05.05.2020 - 54839/17

  The relevant principles with respect to the right of access to a court are set out in a long line of case-law such as Golder v. the United Kingdom (21 February 1975, § 36, Series A no. 18), Baka v. Hungary ([GC], no. 20261/12, § 120, 23 June 2016) and Lupeni Greek Catholic Parish and Others v. Romania ([GC], no. 76943/11, §§ 84-90, 29 November 2016).
• EGMR, 17.01.2012 - 36760/06

  STANEV c. BULGARIE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 05.05.2020 - 54839/17

  The right of access to the courts is not absolute but may be subject to limitations; these are permitted by implication since the right of access by its very nature calls for regulation by the State, regulation which may vary in time and in place according to the needs and resources of the community and of individuals (see Stanev v. Bulgaria [GC], no. 36760/06, § 230, ECHR 2012).
• EGMR, 23.11.1993 - 14032/88

  POITRIMOL c. FRANCE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 05.05.2020 - 54839/17

  However, where such courts do exist, the guarantees of Article 6 must be complied with by, inter alia, ensuring to litigants effective access to the courts for the determination of their "civil rights and obligations" (see, among many other authorities, Levages Prestations Services v. France, 23 October 1996, § 44, Reports of Judgments and Decisions 1996-V, and Poitrimol v. France, 23 November 1993, §§ 13-15, Series A no. 277-A).

 
• EGMR, 21.09.1994 - 17101/90

  FAYED c. ROYAUME-UNI

  Auszug aus EGMR, 05.05.2020 - 54839/17

  Furthermore, a limitation will not be compatible with Article 6 § 1 if it does not pursue a legitimate aim and if there is not a reasonable relationship of proportionality between the means employed and the aim sought to be achieved (ibid., § 230; see also Cordova v. Italy (no. 1), no. 40877/98, § 54, ECHR 2003-I; the recapitulation of the relevant principles in Fayed v. the United Kingdom, 21 September 1994, § 65, Series A no. 294-B; and Lupeni Greek Catholic Parish and Others, cited above, § 89).
• EGMR, 18.01.2005 - 74153/01

  POPOV v. MOLDOVA (No. 1)

  Auszug aus EGMR, 05.05.2020 - 54839/17

  The Court considers that this complaint falls to be examined under Article 6 § 1 only (see Sukhorubchenko v. Russia, no. 69315/01, § 60, 10 February 2005; mutatis mutandis, Assanidze v. Georgia [GC], no. 71503/01, § 187, ECHR 2004-II; and Popov v. Moldova (no. 1), no. 74153/01, § 58, 18 January 2005), the relevant part of which reads as follows:.
• EGMR, 10.01.2012 - 33468/03

  Verletzung der Unschuldsvermutung eines Verstorbenen durch gerichtliche …

  Auszug aus EGMR, 05.05.2020 - 54839/17

  In particular, the mere fact that the State, through its judicial system, provided a forum for the determination of a private-law dispute does not give rise to interference by the State with property rights under Article 1 of Protocol No. 1. The State may be held responsible for losses caused by such determinations if court decisions are not given in accordance with domestic law or if they are flawed by arbitrariness or manifest unreasonableness contrary to Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 (see, for example, Vulakh and Others v. Russia, no. 33468/03, § 44, 10 January 2012).
• EGMR, 18.12.2001 - 37527/97

  KUCHAR ET STIS c. REPUBLIQUE TCHEQUE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 05.05.2020 - 54839/17

  Application no. 54839/17 105. The relevant principles in this regard are set out, mutatis mutandis, in Zagrebacka banka d.d. v. Croatia (no. 39544/05, § 250, 12 December 2013, and the authorities cited therein) and Kuchar and ? tis v. the Czech Republic ((dec.), no. 37527/97, 21 October 1998).