Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  NOWINSKI v. POLAND

  Art. 6, Art. 6 Abs. 1, Art. 8, Art. 13 MRK
  Partly struck out of the list Partly inadmissible (englisch)

Wird zitiert von ... (0)Neu Zitiert selbst (8)

• EGMR, 01.03.2005 - 15212/03

  CHARZYNSKI c. POLOGNE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 07.10.2008 - 14883/04

  The relevant domestic law and practice concerning remedies for the excessive length of judicial proceedings are set out in the Court's decisions in the cases of Charzynski v. Poland no. 15212/03 (dec.), §§ 12-23, ECHR 2005-V; Ratajczyk v. Poland no. 11215/02 (dec.), ECHR 2005-VIII; and the judgment in the case of Krasuski v. Poland, no. 61444/00, §§ 34-46, ECHR 2005-V.

  The Court has established in a number of cases, including those brought against Poland, its practice concerning complaints about the violation of one's right to a hearing within a reasonable time and about the lack of an effective remedy capable of providing redress for a breach of this right (see, for example, Frydlender v. France [GC], no. 30979/96, § 43, ECHR 2000-VII; Cocchiarella v. Italy [GC], no. 64886/01, §§ 69-98, ECHR 2006-....; Majewski v. Poland, no. 52690/99, 11 October 2005; Wende and Kukówka v. Poland, no. 56026/00, 10 May 2007; Kudla v. Poland [GC], no. 30210/96, ECHR 2000-IX, Charzynski v. Poland (dec.) no. 15212/03, HR 2005-..., and Tabor v. Poland, no. 12825/02, 27 June 2006).

• EGMR, 27.06.2000 - 30979/96

  FRYDLENDER c. FRANCE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 07.10.2008 - 14883/04

  The Court has established in a number of cases, including those brought against Poland, its practice concerning complaints about the violation of one's right to a hearing within a reasonable time and about the lack of an effective remedy capable of providing redress for a breach of this right (see, for example, Frydlender v. France [GC], no. 30979/96, § 43, ECHR 2000-VII; Cocchiarella v. Italy [GC], no. 64886/01, §§ 69-98, ECHR 2006-....; Majewski v. Poland, no. 52690/99, 11 October 2005; Wende and Kukówka v. Poland, no. 56026/00, 10 May 2007; Kudla v. Poland [GC], no. 30210/96, ECHR 2000-IX, Charzynski v. Poland (dec.) no. 15212/03, HR 2005-..., and Tabor v. Poland, no. 12825/02, 27 June 2006).
• EGMR, 26.10.2000 - 30210/96

  Das Recht auf Verfahrensbeschleunigung gemäß Art. 6 Abs. 1 S. 1 EMRK in …

  Auszug aus EGMR, 07.10.2008 - 14883/04

  The Court has established in a number of cases, including those brought against Poland, its practice concerning complaints about the violation of one's right to a hearing within a reasonable time and about the lack of an effective remedy capable of providing redress for a breach of this right (see, for example, Frydlender v. France [GC], no. 30979/96, § 43, ECHR 2000-VII; Cocchiarella v. Italy [GC], no. 64886/01, §§ 69-98, ECHR 2006-....; Majewski v. Poland, no. 52690/99, 11 October 2005; Wende and Kukówka v. Poland, no. 56026/00, 10 May 2007; Kudla v. Poland [GC], no. 30210/96, ECHR 2000-IX, Charzynski v. Poland (dec.) no. 15212/03, HR 2005-..., and Tabor v. Poland, no. 12825/02, 27 June 2006).

 
• EGMR, 11.10.2005 - 52690/99

  MAJEWSKI v. POLAND

  Auszug aus EGMR, 07.10.2008 - 14883/04

  The Court has established in a number of cases, including those brought against Poland, its practice concerning complaints about the violation of one's right to a hearing within a reasonable time and about the lack of an effective remedy capable of providing redress for a breach of this right (see, for example, Frydlender v. France [GC], no. 30979/96, § 43, ECHR 2000-VII; Cocchiarella v. Italy [GC], no. 64886/01, §§ 69-98, ECHR 2006-....; Majewski v. Poland, no. 52690/99, 11 October 2005; Wende and Kukówka v. Poland, no. 56026/00, 10 May 2007; Kudla v. Poland [GC], no. 30210/96, ECHR 2000-IX, Charzynski v. Poland (dec.) no. 15212/03, HR 2005-..., and Tabor v. Poland, no. 12825/02, 27 June 2006).
• EGMR, 27.06.2006 - 12825/02

  TABOR v. POLAND

  Auszug aus EGMR, 07.10.2008 - 14883/04

  The Court has established in a number of cases, including those brought against Poland, its practice concerning complaints about the violation of one's right to a hearing within a reasonable time and about the lack of an effective remedy capable of providing redress for a breach of this right (see, for example, Frydlender v. France [GC], no. 30979/96, § 43, ECHR 2000-VII; Cocchiarella v. Italy [GC], no. 64886/01, §§ 69-98, ECHR 2006-....; Majewski v. Poland, no. 52690/99, 11 October 2005; Wende and Kukówka v. Poland, no. 56026/00, 10 May 2007; Kudla v. Poland [GC], no. 30210/96, ECHR 2000-IX, Charzynski v. Poland (dec.) no. 15212/03, HR 2005-..., and Tabor v. Poland, no. 12825/02, 27 June 2006).
• EGMR, 10.05.2007 - 56026/00

  WENDE AND KUKOWKA v. POLAND

  Auszug aus EGMR, 07.10.2008 - 14883/04

  The Court has established in a number of cases, including those brought against Poland, its practice concerning complaints about the violation of one's right to a hearing within a reasonable time and about the lack of an effective remedy capable of providing redress for a breach of this right (see, for example, Frydlender v. France [GC], no. 30979/96, § 43, ECHR 2000-VII; Cocchiarella v. Italy [GC], no. 64886/01, §§ 69-98, ECHR 2006-....; Majewski v. Poland, no. 52690/99, 11 October 2005; Wende and Kukówka v. Poland, no. 56026/00, 10 May 2007; Kudla v. Poland [GC], no. 30210/96, ECHR 2000-IX, Charzynski v. Poland (dec.) no. 15212/03, HR 2005-..., and Tabor v. Poland, no. 12825/02, 27 June 2006).
• EGMR, 18.09.2007 - 28953/03

  SULWINSKA v. POLAND

  Auszug aus EGMR, 07.10.2008 - 14883/04

  To this end, the Court will examine carefully the declaration in the light of the principles emerging from its case-law, in particular the Tahsin Acar judgment (see Tahsin Acar v. Turkey, [GC], no. 26307/95, §§ 75-77, ECHR 2003-VI); WAZA Spólka z o.o. v. Poland (dec.) no. 11602/02, 26 June 2007; and Sulwinska v. Poland (dec.) no. 28953/03).
• EGMR, 24.03.1988 - 10465/83

  OLSSON v. SWEDEN (No. 1)

  Auszug aus EGMR, 07.10.2008 - 14883/04

  It is therefore not the Court's task to substitute itself for the domestic authorities in the exercise of their responsibilities as regards parental authority, but rather to review under the Convention the decisions taken by those authorities in the exercise of their power of appreciation (see, among other authorities, Olsson v. Sweden judgment of 24 March 1988, Series A no. 130 p. 32, § 68).