Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  SOC v. CROATIA

  Art. 6, Art. 6 Abs. 1, Art. 35, Art. 35 Abs. 1, Art. 41, Art. 13 MRK
  Preliminary objection partially accepted (non-exhaustion of domestic remedies) Preliminary objection partially dismissed (non-exhaustion of domestic remedies) No violation of Art. 6-1 Violation of Art. 13 Pecuniary damage - claim dismissed Non-pecuniary damage - ...

Verfahrensgang

• EGMR, 29.06.2000 - 47863/99
• EGMR, 17.01.2002 - 47863/99
• EGMR, 09.05.2003 - 47863/99

Wird zitiert von ... (4)Neu Zitiert selbst (10)

• EGMR, 19.02.1998 - 26102/95

  DALIA v. FRANCE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 09.05.2003 - 47863/99

  The existence of the remedies in question must be sufficiently certain not only in theory but also in practice, failing which they will lack the requisite accessibility and effectiveness (see, inter alia, the Vernillo v. France, judgment of 20 February 1991, Series A no. 198, pp. 11-12, § 27, and Dalia v. France, no. 26102/95, § 38, ECHR 1998-I).
• EGMR, 27.06.2000 - 30979/96

  FRYDLENDER c. FRANCE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 09.05.2003 - 47863/99

  The Court reiterates that the reasonableness of the length of proceedings must be assessed in the light of the circumstances of the case and with reference to the criteria established by its case-law, particularly the complexity of the case, the conduct of the applicant and of the relevant authorities and what was at stake for the applicant in the dispute (see, among many other authorities, Frydlender v. France [GC], no. 30979/96, § 43, ECHR 2000-VII).
• EGMR, 26.10.2000 - 30210/96

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

  Auszug aus EGMR, 09.05.2003 - 47863/99

  The effect of Article 13 is thus to require the provision of a domestic remedy to deal with the substance of an "arguable complaint" under the Convention and to grant appropriate relief (see, among many other authorities, Kudla v. Poland, no. 30210/96, pp. 238, 239, § 157, ECHR 2000-XI).

 
• EGMR, 04.07.2002 - 20862/02

  SLAVICEK contre la CROATIE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 09.05.2003 - 47863/99

  Recalling its decisions in the Slavicek and Nogolica cases where it found that there exists an effective remedy in respect of the length of proceedings still pending in Croatia, the Court sees no reason to depart in the present case from its view expressed in the above-mentioned cases (see Slavicek v. Croatia (dec.), no. 20862/02, 4 July 2002, ECHR 2002-... and Nogolica v. Croatia (dec.), no. 77784/01, 5 September 2002, ECHR 2002-...).
• EGMR, 05.09.2002 - 77784/01

  NOGOLICA c. CROATIE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 09.05.2003 - 47863/99

  Recalling its decisions in the Slavicek and Nogolica cases where it found that there exists an effective remedy in respect of the length of proceedings still pending in Croatia, the Court sees no reason to depart in the present case from its view expressed in the above-mentioned cases (see Slavicek v. Croatia (dec.), no. 20862/02, 4 July 2002, ECHR 2002-... and Nogolica v. Croatia (dec.), no. 77784/01, 5 September 2002, ECHR 2002-...).
• EGMR, 24.05.1988 - 10737/84

  MÜLLER AND OTHERS v. SWITZERLAND

  Auszug aus EGMR, 09.05.2003 - 47863/99

  The need to avoid excessive rigidity and to keep pace with changing circumstances means that many laws are inevitably couched in terms which, to a greater or lesser extent, are vague (see, for example and mutatis mutandis, the Müller and Others v. Switzerland, judgment of 24 May 1988, Series A no. 133, p. 20, § 29 and the Kokkinakis v. Greece, judgment of 25 May 1993, Series A no. 260-A, p. 19, § 40).
• EGMR, 25.05.1993 - 14307/88

  KOKKINAKIS c. GRÈCE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 09.05.2003 - 47863/99

  The need to avoid excessive rigidity and to keep pace with changing circumstances means that many laws are inevitably couched in terms which, to a greater or lesser extent, are vague (see, for example and mutatis mutandis, the Müller and Others v. Switzerland, judgment of 24 May 1988, Series A no. 133, p. 20, § 29 and the Kokkinakis v. Greece, judgment of 25 May 1993, Series A no. 260-A, p. 19, § 40).
• EGMR, 27.04.1988 - 9659/82

  BOYLE AND RICE v. THE UNITED KINGDOM

  Auszug aus EGMR, 09.05.2003 - 47863/99

  Notwithstanding the terms of Article 13 read literally, the existence of an actual breach of another provision of the Convention (a "substantive" provision) is not a prerequisite for the application of the Article 13 (see the Klass and Others v. Germany, judgment of 6 September 1978, Series A no. 28, p. 29, § 64 and Boyle and Rice v. the United Kingdom, judgment of 27 April 1988, Series A no. 131, p. 23, § 52).
• EGMR, 06.09.1978 - 5029/71

  Klass u.a. ./. Deutschland

  Auszug aus EGMR, 09.05.2003 - 47863/99

  Notwithstanding the terms of Article 13 read literally, the existence of an actual breach of another provision of the Convention (a "substantive" provision) is not a prerequisite for the application of the Article 13 (see the Klass and Others v. Germany, judgment of 6 September 1978, Series A no. 28, p. 29, § 64 and Boyle and Rice v. the United Kingdom, judgment of 27 April 1988, Series A no. 131, p. 23, § 52).
• EGMR, 09.12.2015 - 30210/96

  KUDLA ET 204 AUTRES AFFAIRES CONTRE LA POLOGNE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 09.05.2003 - 47863/99

  The Court reiterates that in order to determine the reasonableness of the length of time in question, regard must be had, however, to the state of the case on 5 November 1997 (see, among other authorities, Styranowski v. Poland, no. 28616/95, § 46, ECHR 1998-VIII).

• EGMR, 26.11.2013 - 40756/06

  VLAD AND OTHERS v. ROMANIA

  With regard to complaints about the protraction of proceedings provided for by Articles 522 to 529 of the new Code of Civil Procedure in force as of 15 February 2013 (paragraph 73 above), the Court reiterates that an effective remedy must be available both for proceedings that have already ended and for those still pending (Soc v. Croatia, no. 47863/99, § 94, 9 May 2003; Paulino Tomás, cited above; and Mifsud v. France (dec.) [GC], no. 57220/00, § 17, ECHR 2002-VIII).
• EGMR, 06.10.2015 - 58842/09

  ATV PRIVATFERNSEH-GMBH v. AUSTRIA

  However, once this burden of proof has been discharged, it falls to the applicant to establish that the remedy advanced by the Government was in fact exhausted or was for some reason inadequate and ineffective in the particular circumstances of the case or that there existed special circumstances absolving him or her from the requirement (see, inter alia, Soc v. Croatia, no. 47863/99, § 91, 9 May 2003).
• EGMR, 02.02.2016 - 41767/09

  BATISTA LABORDE v. AUSTRIA

  However, once this burden of proof has been discharged, it falls to the applicant to establish that the remedy advanced by the Government was in fact exhausted or was for some reason inadequate and ineffective in the particular circumstances of the case or that there existed special circumstances absolving him or her from the requirement (see, amongst others, Soc v. Croatia, no. 47863/99, § 91, 9 May 2003).
• EGMR, 31.05.2007 - 26828/06

  MAKUC AND OTHERS v. SLOVENIA

  In this regard, the Court reiterates that Article 6 § 1 of the Convention does not apply to proceedings regulating a person's citizenship and/or the entry, stay and deportation of aliens, as such proceedings do not involve either the "determination of his civil rights and obligations or of any criminal charge against him" within the meaning of 6 § 1 of the Convention (see, among other authorities, Slivenko v. Latvia (dec.) [GC], no. 48321/99, ECHR 2002-II (extracts), § 94; Maaouia v. France [GC], no. 39652/98, § 36-40, ECHR 2000-X; Karassev v. Finland (dec.), cited above; S. v. Switzerland no. 13325/87, (dec.), 15 December 1988, DR 59 p. 257; and Soc v. Croatia (dec.), no. 47863/99, 29 June 2000).