Rechtsprechung
   EGMR, 06.11.2007 - 13909/05   

Sie müssen eingeloggt sein, um diese Funktion zu nutzen.

Sie haben noch kein Nutzerkonto? In weniger als einer Minute ist es eingerichtet und Sie können sofort diese und weitere kostenlose Zusatzfunktionen nutzen.

| | Was ist die Merkfunktion?
Ablegen in
Benachrichtigen, wenn:




 
Alle auswählen
 

Zitiervorschläge

https://dejure.org/2007,55249
EGMR, 06.11.2007 - 13909/05 (https://dejure.org/2007,55249)
EGMR, Entscheidung vom 06.11.2007 - 13909/05 (https://dejure.org/2007,55249)
EGMR, Entscheidung vom 06. November 2007 - 13909/05 (https://dejure.org/2007,55249)
Tipp: Um den Kurzlink (hier: https://dejure.org/2007,55249) schnell in die Zwischenablage zu kopieren, können Sie die Tastenkombination Alt + R verwenden - auch ohne diesen Bereich zu öffnen.

Volltextveröffentlichung

  • Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

    LEPOJIC v. SERBIA

    Art. 10, Art. 10 Abs. 1, Art. 10 Abs. 2, Art. 29, Art. 29 Abs. 3, Art. 35, Art. 35 Abs. 1, Art. 35 Abs. 3, Art. 41, Art. 6 MRK
    Violation of Art. 10 No separate issue under Art. 6 Non-pecuniary damage - financial award Costs and expenses (domestic proceedings) - claim dismissed Costs and expenses partial award - Convention proceedings (englisch)

 
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 ... (15)

  • EGMR, 03.12.2013 - 64520/10

    UNGVÁRY AND IRODALOM KFT. v. HUNGARY

    In this regard, the amount of compensation awarded must "bear a reasonable relationship of proportionality to the... [moral]... injury... suffered" by the plaintiff in question (see Tolstoy Miloslavsky v. the United Kingdom, 13 July 1995, § 49 Series A no. 316-B; and Steel and Morris v. the United Kingdom, no. 68416/01, § 96, ECHR 2005-II, where the Court held that the damages "awarded... although relatively moderate by contemporary standards... [were]... very substantial when compared to the modest incomes and resources of the... applicants..." and, as such, in breach of the Convention; see also Lepojic v. Serbia, no. 13909/05, § 77 in fine, 6 November 2007, where the reasoning of the domestic courts was found to be insufficient given, inter alia, the amount of compensation and costs awarded equivalent to approximately eight average monthly salaries).
  • EGMR, 04.06.2009 - 2839/08

    KNAPIC v. CROATIA

    26, p. 242; V.S. v. the Slovak Republic, no. 30894/96, Commission decision of 22 October 1997; Malfatti v. the Slovak Republic, no. 38855/97, Commission decision of 1 July 1998; Kucherenko v. Ukraine (dec), no. 41974/98, 4 May 1999; A. v. Finland (dec.), no. 44998/98, 8 January 2004; and Lepojic v. Serbia, no. 13909/05, § 53, 6 November 2007).

    The Court notes that exactly the same remedy as the one in the present case exists under Article 419 of the Serbian Criminal Procedure Code and that it has already found that it was not a remedy to be exhausted in a case concerning Serbia (see Lepojic v. Serbia, no. 13909/05, § 54, 6 November 2007).

  • EGMR, 30.08.2016 - 55442/12

    MEDIPRESS-SOCIEDADE JORNALÍSTICA, LDA c. PORTUGAL

    En effet, la Cour note que les cours nationales n'ont pas pris en considération la nature ironique des assertions du journaliste dans le contexte de sa critique sur les «nouvelles règles du journalisme» proposées par le gouvernement (Lepojic c. Serbie, no 13909/05, § 77, 6 novembre 2007, et Sokolowski c. Pologne, no 75955/01, 46, 29 mars 2005).
  • EGMR, 02.04.2015 - 679/11

    SOLOMUN v. CROATIA

    In particular, it observed that a request for the protection of legality before the Supreme Court against final decisions in civil proceedings could be lodged only by an organ of the State â?? in the present case the State Attorney's Office â?? with full discretion in deciding whether or not to use that remedy (Ibid., §§ 53-58; see further in the context of criminal proceedings Lepojic v. Serbia, no. 13909/05, §§ 30-31 and 54, 6 November 2007).
  • EGMR, 15.07.2014 - 40485/08

    PETROVIC v. SERBIA

    In this latter connection, the Court notes that the request for the protection of legality was admittedly of a discretionary character, and normally such a remedy is not considered to be effective (see Lepojic v. Serbia, no. 13909/05, § 54, 6 November 2007) and could not restart the running of the six-month limit (see, for example, Kucherenko v. Ukraine (dec.), no. 41974/98, 4 May 1999).
  • EGMR, 05.12.2017 - 66895/10

    ALKOVIC v. MONTENEGRO

    Turning to the present case, the Court has already found that a request for the protection of legality is not an effective domestic remedy, given that it can only be filed by a public prosecutor (see Lepojic v. Serbia, no. 13909/05, § 54, 6 November 2007).
  • EGMR, 17.09.2009 - 27865/02

    BOCVARSKA v. "THE FORMER YUGOSLAV REPUBLIC OF MACEDONIA"

    In addition, the public prosecutor had full discretion in deciding whether to lodge the legality review request with the Supreme Court (see Lepojic v. Serbia, no. 13909/05, § 54, 6 November 2007, and Dimitrovska v. the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia (dec.), no. 21466/03, 30 September 2008).
  • EGMR, 28.04.2009 - 31320/05

    MILOSEVIC v. SERBIA

    This remedy was thus also ineffective as understood by Article 35 § 1 of the Convention (see Lepojic v. Serbia, no. 13909/05, § 54, 6 November 2007).
  • EGMR, 17.09.2013 - 40410/07

    KOSTIC v. SERBIA

    Having examined this complaint under Article 8 of the Convention, the Court notes that the applicant did not lodge a civil claim for damages based on Articles 172, 199 and/or 200 of the Obligations Act in this respect (see, as regards the relevant domestic law, Hajnal v. Serbia, no. 36937/06, §§ 67-8 and 142, 19 June 2012, and Lepojic v. Serbia, no. 13909/05, §§ 14-17 and 32, 6 November 2007).
  • EGMR, 22.11.2011 - 41158/09

    KOPRIVICA v. MONTENEGRO

    Finally, the amount of compensation awarded must "bear a reasonable relationship of proportionality to the... [moral]... injury... suffered" by the plaintiff in question (see Tolstoy Miloslavsky v. the United Kingdom, 13 July 1995, § 49 Series A no. 316-B; Steel and Morris v. the United Kingdom, no. 68416/01, § 96, ECHR 2005 - II, where the Court held that the damages "awarded... although relatively moderate by contemporary standards... [were]... very substantial when compared to the modest incomes and resources of the... applicants..." and, as such, in breach of the Convention; see also Lepojic v. Serbia, no. 13909/05, § 77 in fine, 6 November 2007, where the reasoning of the domestic courts was found to be insufficient given, inter alia, the amount of compensation and costs awarded equivalent to approximately eight average monthly salaries).
  • EGMR - 5995/06

    [ENG]

  • EGMR, 01.07.2014 - 7837/10

    GAVRILOV v. "THE FORMER YUGOSLAV REPUBLIC OF MACEDONIA"

  • EGMR, 30.09.2008 - 21466/03

    DIMITROVSKA v. "THE FORMER YUGOSLAV REPUBLIC OF MACEDONIA"

  • EGMR, 16.09.2008 - 1431/03

    STOJANOVSKI v. "THE FORMER YUGOSLAV REPUBLIC OF MACEDONIA"

  • EGMR, 19.06.2008 - 22742/02

    MANEVSKI v. "THE FORMER YUGOSLAV REPUBLIC OF MACEDONIA"

Haben Sie eine Ergänzung? Oder haben Sie einen Fehler gefunden? Schreiben Sie uns.
Neu: Die Merklistenfunktion erreichen Sie nun über das Lesezeichen oben.
Sie können auswählen (Maus oder Pfeiltasten):
(Liste aufgrund Ihrer bisherigen Eingabe)
Komplette Übersicht