Rechtsprechung
| EGMR, 06.09.2007 - 19177/03 |
Volltextveröffentlichung
- Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte
SCHMALZ v. POLAND
Wird zitiert von ... (0) Neu Zitiert selbst (7)
- EGMR, 26.10.2000 - 30210/96
Das Recht auf Verfahrensbeschleunigung gemäß Art. 6 Abs. 1 S. 1 EMRK in …
Auszug aus EGMR, 06.09.2007 - 19177/03
A more detailed rendition of the relevant domestic law provisions is set out in the Court's judgment in Kudla v. Poland [GC], no. 30210/96, § 75, ECHR 2000-XI, Celejewski v. Poland, no. 17584/04, §§ 22 and 23, 4 May 2006.Continued detention can be justified in a given case only if there are specific indications of a genuine requirement of public interest which, notwithstanding the presumption of innocence, outweighs the rule of respect for individual liberty (see, among other authorities, W. v. Switzerland, judgment of 26 January 1993, Series A no. 254-A, p. 15, § 30, and Kudla v. Poland [GC], no. 30210/96, § 110, ECHR 2000-XI).
- EGMR, 04.05.2006 - 17584/04
CELEJEWSKI v. POLAND
Auszug aus EGMR, 06.09.2007 - 19177/03
A more detailed rendition of the relevant domestic law provisions is set out in the Court's judgment in Kudla v. Poland [GC], no. 30210/96, § 75, ECHR 2000-XI, Celejewski v. Poland, no. 17584/04, §§ 22 and 23, 4 May 2006.The Court will therefore take into account in assessing the conduct of the authorities in the present case the special circumstances deriving from the fact that it concerned a member of a criminal gang (see Celejewski v. Poland, no. 17584/04, 4 May 2006).
- EGMR, 06.04.2000 - 26772/95
LABITA c. ITALIE
Auszug aus EGMR, 06.09.2007 - 19177/03
Where such grounds were "relevant" and "sufficient", the Court must also ascertain whether the competent national authorities displayed "special diligence" in the conduct of the proceedings (see Labita v. Italy [GC], no. 26772/95, § 153, ECHR 2000-IV, and Jablonski v. Poland, no. 33492/96, § 80, 21 December 2000).
- EGMR, 21.12.2000 - 33492/96
JABLONSKI v. POLAND
Auszug aus EGMR, 06.09.2007 - 19177/03
Where such grounds were "relevant" and "sufficient", the Court must also ascertain whether the competent national authorities displayed "special diligence" in the conduct of the proceedings (see Labita v. Italy [GC], no. 26772/95, § 153, ECHR 2000-IV, and Jablonski v. Poland, no. 33492/96, § 80, 21 December 2000). - EGMR, 03.10.2006 - 543/03
McKAY c. ROYAUME-UNI
Auszug aus EGMR, 06.09.2007 - 19177/03
Until conviction, he must be presumed innocent, and the purpose of the provision under consideration is essentially to require his provisional release once his continuing detention ceases to be reasonable (see McKay v. the United Kingdom [GC], no. 543/03, § 41, ECHR 2006-...). - EGMR, 26.01.1993 - 14379/88
W. c. SUISSE
Auszug aus EGMR, 06.09.2007 - 19177/03
Continued detention can be justified in a given case only if there are specific indications of a genuine requirement of public interest which, notwithstanding the presumption of innocence, outweighs the rule of respect for individual liberty (see, among other authorities, W. v. Switzerland, judgment of 26 January 1993, Series A no. 254-A, p. 15, § 30, and Kudla v. Poland [GC], no. 30210/96, § 110, ECHR 2000-XI). - EGMR, 27.06.1968 - 1936/63
Neumeister ./. Österreich
Auszug aus EGMR, 06.09.2007 - 19177/03
As established in Neumeister v. Austria (judgment of 27 June 1968, Series A no. 8, p.37, § 4), the second limb of Article 5 § 3 does not give judicial authorities a choice between either bringing an accused to trial within a reasonable time or granting him provisional release pending trial.