Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  GORYACHEV v. RUSSIA

  Art. 5, Art. 37, Art. 37 Abs. 1 Buchst. c MRK
  Struck out of the list (englisch)

Sonstiges

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte (Verfahrensmitteilung)

  [ENG]

Wird zitiert von ...Neu Zitiert selbst (5)

• EGMR, 15.03.2011 - 8655/10

  F.I. v. THE UNITED KINGDOM

  Auszug aus EGMR, 09.04.2013 - 34886/06

  It is clear from the latter provision that the Court enjoys a wide discretion in identifying grounds capable of being relied upon in striking out an application on this basis, it being understood, however, that such grounds must reside in the particular circumstances of each case (see Association SOS Attentats and de Boery v. France [GC], (dec.), no. 76642/01, § 37, ECHR 2006-XIV, F.I. and Others v. the United Kingdom (dec.), no. 8655/10, 15 March 2011, and summary of case-law on the matter in Atmaca v. Germany (dec.), no. 45293/06, 6 March 2012).
• EGMR, 24.10.2002 - 36732/97

  PISANO c. ITALIE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 09.04.2013 - 34886/06

  Further, the Court observes that the matter could not be considered resolved within the meaning of Article 37 § 1 (b) of the Convention (see for the criteria developed in the Court's case-law on that point, inter alia, Pisano v. Italy (striking out) [GC], no. 36732/97, § 42, 24 October 2002; Sisojeva and Others v. Latvia (striking out) [GC], no. 60654/00, § 97, ECHR 2007-I; and El Majjaoui and Stichting Touba Moskee v. the Netherlands (striking out) [GC], no. 25525/03, § 30, 20 December 2007).
• EGMR, 20.12.2007 - 25525/03

  EL MAJJAOUI AND STICHTING TOUBA MOSKEE v. THE NETHERLANDS

  Auszug aus EGMR, 09.04.2013 - 34886/06

  Further, the Court observes that the matter could not be considered resolved within the meaning of Article 37 § 1 (b) of the Convention (see for the criteria developed in the Court's case-law on that point, inter alia, Pisano v. Italy (striking out) [GC], no. 36732/97, § 42, 24 October 2002; Sisojeva and Others v. Latvia (striking out) [GC], no. 60654/00, § 97, ECHR 2007-I; and El Majjaoui and Stichting Touba Moskee v. the Netherlands (striking out) [GC], no. 25525/03, § 30, 20 December 2007).
• EGMR, 06.03.2012 - 45293/06

  ATMACA v. GERMANY

  Auszug aus EGMR, 09.04.2013 - 34886/06

  It is clear from the latter provision that the Court enjoys a wide discretion in identifying grounds capable of being relied upon in striking out an application on this basis, it being understood, however, that such grounds must reside in the particular circumstances of each case (see Association SOS Attentats and de Boery v. France [GC], (dec.), no. 76642/01, § 37, ECHR 2006-XIV, F.I. and Others v. the United Kingdom (dec.), no. 8655/10, 15 March 2011, and summary of case-law on the matter in Atmaca v. Germany (dec.), no. 45293/06, 6 March 2012).
• EGMR, 04.10.2006 - 76642/01

  ASSOCIATION SOS ATTENTATS ET DE BOERY c. FRANCE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 09.04.2013 - 34886/06

  It is clear from the latter provision that the Court enjoys a wide discretion in identifying grounds capable of being relied upon in striking out an application on this basis, it being understood, however, that such grounds must reside in the particular circumstances of each case (see Association SOS Attentats and de Boery v. France [GC], (dec.), no. 76642/01, § 37, ECHR 2006-XIV, F.I. and Others v. the United Kingdom (dec.), no. 8655/10, 15 March 2011, and summary of case-law on the matter in Atmaca v. Germany (dec.), no. 45293/06, 6 March 2012).

• EGMR, 02.09.2021 - 72475/10

  TKHELIDZE v. GEORGIA

  Thus, the Court had previously considered appropriate to strike applications from the list of cases in the light of lack of diligence on the part of applicants (see, for example, Goryachev v. Russia (dec.), no. 34886/06, §§ 27-30 and 42-43, 9 April 2013; see also Hun v. Turkey (dec.), no. 5142/04, 10 November 2005, and Mürrüvet Küçük v. Turkey (dec.), no. 21784/04, 10 November 2005).