|EGMR, 06.11.2007 - 22531/05|
- Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte
BUGAJNY AND OTHERS v. POLAND
Art. 29, Art. 29 Abs. 3, Art. 35, Art. 35 Abs. 1, Art. 41, Protokoll Nr. 1 Art. 1, Protokoll Nr. 1 Art. 1 Abs. 1 MRK
Violation of P1-1 Pecuniary damage - financial award Costs and expenses award - domestic proceedings (englisch)
- EGMR, 06.11.2007 - 22531/05
- EGMR, 15.12.2009 - 22531/05
- EGMR, 18.10.2011 - 10247/09
SOSINOWSKA v. POLANDGiven the multiplicity of legal bases for the punishment imposed on the applicant and also bearing in mind that the Polish Constitutional Court lacks jurisdiction to examine the way in which the provisions of domestic law have been interpreted and applied in an individual case (see paragraph 37 above), the Court is of the view that it has not been shown that a constitutional complaint was, in the circumstances of the case, an effective remedy to which the applicant should have had recourse for the purposes of Article 34 of the Convention (see Bobek v. Poland, no. 68761/01, §§ 70-73, 17 July 2007; Luboch v. Poland, no. 37469/05, § 71, 15 January 2008; Bugajny and Others v. Poland, no. 22531/05, § 45, 6 November 2007).
- EGMR, 18.05.2010 - 31264/04
WIECZOREK v. POLANDHaving regard to the general principle according to which it is in the first place for the national courts themselves to interpret the provisions of domestic law, the Court reiterates that its jurisdiction to review the correctness of the judicial application of the domestic law is limited (see, Bugajny and Others v. Poland, no. 22531/05, §§ 65-66, 6 November 2007).
Neu: Die Merklistenfunktion erreichen Sie nun über das Lesezeichen oben.