Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  SIITONEN v. FINLAND

  Art. 6, Art. 13, Art. 37, Art. 37 Abs. 1 MRK
  Struck out of the list (englisch)

Wird zitiert von ... (0)Neu Zitiert selbst (6)

• EGMR, 27.06.2000 - 30979/96

  FRYDLENDER c. FRANCE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 06.10.2009 - 35631/07

  The Court has established in a number of cases its practice concerning complaints about the violation of one's right to a hearing within a reasonable time (see, for example, Frydlender v. France [GC], no. 30979/96, § 43, ECHR 2000-VII and Cocchiarella v. Italy [GC], no. 64886/01, §§ 69-98, ECHR 2006-).
• EGMR, 31.05.2007 - 25072/02

  RIIHIKALLIO AND OTHERS v. FINLAND

  Auszug aus EGMR, 06.10.2009 - 35631/07

  Furthermore, it has already had occasion to address complaints related to alleged breach of one's right to a hearing within a reasonable time in cases against Finland (see, for example, Riihikallio and Others v. Finland, no. 25072/02, §§ 22-27, 31 May 2007; F. and M. v. Finland, no. 22508/02, §§ 48-53, 17 July 2007 and Ekholm v. Finland, no. 68050/01, §§ 62-66, 24 July 2007).
• EGMR, 17.07.2007 - 22508/02

  F AND M v. FINLAND

  Auszug aus EGMR, 06.10.2009 - 35631/07

  Furthermore, it has already had occasion to address complaints related to alleged breach of one's right to a hearing within a reasonable time in cases against Finland (see, for example, Riihikallio and Others v. Finland, no. 25072/02, §§ 22-27, 31 May 2007; F. and M. v. Finland, no. 22508/02, §§ 48-53, 17 July 2007 and Ekholm v. Finland, no. 68050/01, §§ 62-66, 24 July 2007).

 
• EGMR, 24.07.2007 - 68050/01

  EKHOLM v. FINLAND

  Auszug aus EGMR, 06.10.2009 - 35631/07

  Furthermore, it has already had occasion to address complaints related to alleged breach of one's right to a hearing within a reasonable time in cases against Finland (see, for example, Riihikallio and Others v. Finland, no. 25072/02, §§ 22-27, 31 May 2007; F. and M. v. Finland, no. 22508/02, §§ 48-53, 17 July 2007 and Ekholm v. Finland, no. 68050/01, §§ 62-66, 24 July 2007).
• EGMR, 06.01.2009 - 20532/05

  VIINIKANOJA v. FINLAND

  Auszug aus EGMR, 06.10.2009 - 35631/07

  In deciding whether or not it should strike the length of proceedings complaint out of its list, the Court will examine carefully the terms of the declaration made by the Government in the light of the principles emerging from its case-law, in particular its judgments and decisions in cases such as Tahsin Acar v. Turkey [GC] (no. 26307/95, §§ 75-77, ECHR 2003-VI); Meriakri v. Moldova ((striking out), no. 53487/99, 1 March 2005); Swedish Transport Workers Union v. Sweden ((striking out), no. 53507/99, 18 July 2006); Van Houten v. the Netherlands ((striking out), no. 25149/03, ECHR 2005-IX); Kalanyos and Others v. Romania (no. 57884/00, § 25, 26 April 2007); Viinikanoja v. Finland ((partial striking out), no. 20532/05, 6 January 2009); and Nevala v. Finland, ((partial striking out), no. 10391/06, 20 January 2009).
• EGMR, 20.01.2009 - 10391/06

  NEVALA v. FINLAND

  Auszug aus EGMR, 06.10.2009 - 35631/07

  In deciding whether or not it should strike the length of proceedings complaint out of its list, the Court will examine carefully the terms of the declaration made by the Government in the light of the principles emerging from its case-law, in particular its judgments and decisions in cases such as Tahsin Acar v. Turkey [GC] (no. 26307/95, §§ 75-77, ECHR 2003-VI); Meriakri v. Moldova ((striking out), no. 53487/99, 1 March 2005); Swedish Transport Workers Union v. Sweden ((striking out), no. 53507/99, 18 July 2006); Van Houten v. the Netherlands ((striking out), no. 25149/03, ECHR 2005-IX); Kalanyos and Others v. Romania (no. 57884/00, § 25, 26 April 2007); Viinikanoja v. Finland ((partial striking out), no. 20532/05, 6 January 2009); and Nevala v. Finland, ((partial striking out), no. 10391/06, 20 January 2009).