Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  YILMAZ (2) v. TURKEY

  (englisch)

Wird zitiert von ... (2)Neu Zitiert selbst (2)

• EGMR, 17.01.1970 - 2689/65

  DELCOURT c. BELGIQUE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 08.04.2008 - 16741/04

  Where, however, domestic law provides for a right of appeal, the appeal proceedings will be treated as an extension of the trial process and, accordingly, will be subject to Article 6 (see Delcourt v. Belgium, judgment of 17 January 1970, Series A no. 11, § 25).
• EGMR, 23.02.1994 - 16757/90

  STANFORD v. THE UNITED KINGDOM

  Auszug aus EGMR, 08.04.2008 - 16741/04

  Such rights are implicit in the very notion of an adversarial procedure and can also be derived from the guarantees contained in sub-paragraphs (c) and (e) of Article 6 § 3 (see, among other authorities, Stanford v. the United Kingdom, judgment of 23 February 1994, Series A no. 282-A, pp. 10-11, § 26).

• EGMR, 17.03.2020 - 75845/12

  SIMSEK, ANDIÇ ET BOGATEKIN c. TURQUIE

  En effet, l'article 6 de la Convention, sous son volet pénal, tout comme l'article 13, ne consacre aucun droit à se pourvoir en appel ou à avoir accès à une juridiction de seconde instance (voir, par exemple, Nurhan Yilmaz c. Turquie (no 2), no 16741/04, § 21, 8 avril 2008, Kopczynski v. Pologne (déc.), no 28863/95, 1er juillet1998, Csepyová c. Slovaquie (déc.), no 67199/01, 14 mai 2002, Gurepka c. Ukraine, no 61406/00, § 51, 6 septembre 2005, et Dorado Baúlde c. Espagne (déc.), § 18, 1er septembre 2015).
• EGMR, 22.09.2009 - 37215/04

  ALDEMIR v. TURKEY

  The Court recalls that it has frequently found violations of Article 6 § 1 of the Convention in cases raising issues similar to the one in the present applications (see, inter alia, KarahanoÄ?lu v. Turkey, no. 74341/01, §§ 35-39, 3 October 2006; Evrenos Önen v. Turkey, no. 29782/02, §§ 29-33, 15 February 2007; Nurhan Yılmaz v. Turkey (no. 2), no. 16741/04, §§ 22-24, 8 April 2008; Günseli Kaya v. Turkey (no. 2), no. 40886/02, §§ 29- 32, 23 June 2009).