Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  DESERVIRE S.R.L. v. MOLDOVA

  (englisch)

Wird zitiert von ...Neu Zitiert selbst (3)

• EGMR, 27.06.2000 - 30979/96

  FRYDLENDER c. FRANCE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 06.10.2009 - 17328/04

  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, and Cravcenco v. Moldova, no. 13012/02, § 44, 15 January 2008).

  As to the conduct of the judicial authorities, the Court reiterates that it is for the Contracting States to organise their legal systems in such a way that their courts can guarantee to everyone the right to a final decision within a reasonable time in the determination of his or her civil rights and obligations (see Frydlender v. France [GC], no. 30979/96, § 45, ECHR 2000-VII).

• EGMR, 22.03.2005 - 6267/02

  ROSCA v. MOLDOVA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 06.10.2009 - 17328/04

  The proceedings were subsequently re-opened (see paragraph 19 above) through an extraordinary procedure of a type that is in itself contrary to Article 6 of the Convention (see, for instance, Brumarescu v. Romania [GC], no. 28342/95, § 65, ECHR 1999-VII and Rosca v. Moldova, no. 6267/02, § 29, 22 March 2005).
• EGMR, 15.01.2008 - 13012/02

  CRAVCENCO v. MOLDOVA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 06.10.2009 - 17328/04

  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, and Cravcenco v. Moldova, no. 13012/02, § 44, 15 January 2008).

• EGMR, 28.06.2011 - 44964/05

  OCULIST ET IMAS c. MOLDOVA

  Cependant, pour autant qu'il s'agisse du montant de la satisfaction équitable proposée par le Gouvernement, la Cour estime qu'au vu des sommes qu'elle a octroyées à ce titre dans des affaires similaires (voir, parmi d'autres, Cravcenco c. Moldova, no 13012/02, 15 janvier 2008; Boboc c. Moldova, no 27581/04, 4 novembre 2008; Deservire SRL c. Moldova, no 17328/04, 6 octobre 2009), le montant proposé en l'occurrence ne saurait constituer une réparation adéquate.