Rechtsprechung
| EGMR, 07.12.2010 - 17202/04 |
Zitiervorschläge
Tipp: Um den Kurzlink (hier: https://dejure.org/2010,64876) schnell in die Zwischenablage zu kopieren, können Sie die Tastenkombination Alt + R verwenden - auch ohne diesen Bereich zu öffnen.
Volltextveröffentlichung
- Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte
ANDERSSON v. SWEDEN
Art. 6, Art. 6 Abs. 1, Art. 41 MRK
Violation of Art. 6-1 Pecuniary damage - award (englisch)
Verfahrensgang
- EGMR, 03.06.2008 - 17202/04
- EGMR, 07.12.2010 - 17202/04
- EGMR, 30.04.2014 - 17202/04
- EGMR - 17202/04
Wird zitiert von ... (0) Neu Zitiert selbst (5)
- EGMR, 21.02.1990 - 11855/85
H?KANSSON AND STURESSON v. SWEDEN
Auszug aus EGMR, 07.12.2010 - 17202/04
There can be no question of the applicant having waived any right to a hearing under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention (cf, Håkansson and Sturesson v. Sweden, 21 February 1990, §§ 64 and 66, Series A no. 171-A; and Schuler-Zgraggen v. Switzerland, cited above, § 58). - EGMR, 24.06.1993 - 14518/89
SCHULER-ZGRAGGEN c. SUISSE
Auszug aus EGMR, 07.12.2010 - 17202/04
Systematically holding hearings could be an obstacle to the particular diligence required in social-security cases (see Schuler-Zgraggen v. Switzerland, 24 June 1993, § 58, Series A no. 263; Salomonsson v. Sweden, cited above, § 38; Lundevall v. Sweden, cited above, § 38; and Döry v. Sweden, cited above, § 41). - EGMR, 29.10.1991 - 11826/85
HELMERS c. SUÈDE
Auszug aus EGMR, 07.12.2010 - 17202/04
Regard must be had to the nature of the national appeal system, to the scope of the appellate court's powers and to the manner in which the applicant's interests are actually presented and protected in the appeal, particularly in the light of the nature of the issues to be decided by it, and whether these raise any questions of fact or questions of law which cannot be adequately resolved on the basis of the case-file (see for instance Helmers v. Sweden, 29 October 1991, § 36, Series A no. 212-A). - EGMR, 26.04.1995 - 16922/90
FISCHER c. AUTRICHE
Auszug aus EGMR, 07.12.2010 - 17202/04
The Court reiterates that in proceedings before a court of first and only instance the right to a "public hearing" under Article 6 § 1 entails an entitlement to an "oral hearing" unless there are exceptional circumstances that justify dispensing with such a hearing (see, for instance, Fredin v. Sweden (no. 2), 23 February 1994, §§ 21-22, Series A no. 283-A; Fischer v. Austria, 26 April 1995, § 44, Series A no. 312; Allan Jacobsson v. Sweden (no. 2), 19 February 1998, § 46, Reports of Judgments and Decisions 1998-I; Salomonsson v. Sweden, no. 38978/97, § 34, 12 November 2002; Lundevall v. Sweden, no. 38629/97, § 34, 12 November 2002; Döry v. Sweden, no. 28394/95, § 37, 12 November 2002; Göç v. Turkey [GC], no. 36590/97, §§ 47-52, ECHR 2002-V; and Vilho Eskelinen and Others v. Finland [GC], no. 63235/00, § 73, ECHR 2007-IV). - EGMR, 23.02.1994 - 18928/91
FREDIN c. SUÈDE (N° 2)
Auszug aus EGMR, 07.12.2010 - 17202/04
The Court reiterates that in proceedings before a court of first and only instance the right to a "public hearing" under Article 6 § 1 entails an entitlement to an "oral hearing" unless there are exceptional circumstances that justify dispensing with such a hearing (see, for instance, Fredin v. Sweden (no. 2), 23 February 1994, §§ 21-22, Series A no. 283-A; Fischer v. Austria, 26 April 1995, § 44, Series A no. 312; Allan Jacobsson v. Sweden (no. 2), 19 February 1998, § 46, Reports of Judgments and Decisions 1998-I; Salomonsson v. Sweden, no. 38978/97, § 34, 12 November 2002; Lundevall v. Sweden, no. 38629/97, § 34, 12 November 2002; Döry v. Sweden, no. 28394/95, § 37, 12 November 2002; Göç v. Turkey [GC], no. 36590/97, §§ 47-52, ECHR 2002-V; and Vilho Eskelinen and Others v. Finland [GC], no. 63235/00, § 73, ECHR 2007-IV).