Volltextveröffentlichungen (3)

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  A.K. v. LIECHTENSTEIN

  Art. 6, Art. 6 Abs. 1, Art. 41 MRK
  Violation of Article 6 - Right to a fair trial (Article 6 - Civil proceedings Constitutional proceedings Article 6-1 - Impartial tribunal) Pecuniary damage - claim dismissed (Article 41 - Just satisfaction) Non-pecuniary damage - finding of violation sufficient ...

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  A.K. v. LIECHTENSTEIN - [Deutsche Übersetzung] Zusammenfassung durch das Österreichische Institut für Menschenrechte (ÖIM)

  [DEU] Violation of Article 6 - Right to a fair trial (Article 6 - Civil proceedings;Constitutional proceedings;Article 6-1 - Impartial tribunal);Pecuniary damage - claim dismissed (Article 41 - Pecuniary damage;Just satisfaction);Non-pecuniary damage - finding of ...

• juris(Abodienst) (Volltext/Leitsatz)

Sonstiges

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte (Verfahrensmitteilung)

  A.K. v. LIECHTENSTEIN

  Art. 6, Art. 6 Abs. 1 MRK
  [ENG]

Verfahrensgang

• EGMR, 09.07.2015 - 38191/12
• EGMR, 09.11.2016 - 38191/12

Papierfundstellen

• NVwZ 2016, 1541

Wird zitiert von ... (0)Neu Zitiert selbst (14)

• EGMR, 28.06.1984 - 7819/77

  CAMPBELL AND FELL v. THE UNITED KINGDOM

  Auszug aus EGMR, 09.07.2015 - 38191/12

  Moreover, the judges" independence was not compromised by their term of office of five years (compare, mutatis mutandis, Campbell and Fell v. the United Kingdom, 28 June 1984, §§ 78 and 80, Series A no. 80).
• EGMR, 28.06.1978 - 6232/73

  König ./. Deutschland

  Auszug aus EGMR, 09.07.2015 - 38191/12

  Firstly, the right at stake in both the main and the injunction proceedings should be "civil" within the autonomous meaning of that notion under Article 6 of the Convention (see, inter alia, König v. Germany, 28 June 1978, §§ 89-90, Series A no. 27; Stran Greek Refineries and Stratis Andreadis v. Greece, 9 December 1994, § 39, Series A no. 301-B; Ferrazzini v. Italy [GC], no. 44759/98, §§ 24-31, ECHR 2001-VII; and Roche v. the United Kingdom [GC], no. 32555/96, § 119, ECHR 2005-X).
• EGMR, 12.07.2001 - 44759/98

  Verletzung des Rechts auf ein faires Verfahren durch überlange Verfahrensdauer; …

  Auszug aus EGMR, 09.07.2015 - 38191/12

  Firstly, the right at stake in both the main and the injunction proceedings should be "civil" within the autonomous meaning of that notion under Article 6 of the Convention (see, inter alia, König v. Germany, 28 June 1978, §§ 89-90, Series A no. 27; Stran Greek Refineries and Stratis Andreadis v. Greece, 9 December 1994, § 39, Series A no. 301-B; Ferrazzini v. Italy [GC], no. 44759/98, §§ 24-31, ECHR 2001-VII; and Roche v. the United Kingdom [GC], no. 32555/96, § 119, ECHR 2005-X).

 
• EGMR, 24.11.1986 - 9063/80

  GILLOW v. THE UNITED KINGDOM

  Auszug aus EGMR, 09.07.2015 - 38191/12

  The Court considers, in particular, that the fact that some of the judges of the Constitutional Court already dealt with different cases involving the applicant in which his claims were not allowed, even if there was a factual nexus between those cases, does not as such suffice to give rise to legitimate doubts as to their impartiality (compare, mutatis mutandis, for instance, Gillow v. the United Kingdom, 24 November 1986, § 73, Series A no. 109).
• EGMR, 09.01.2013 - 21722/11

  OLEKSANDR VOLKOV c. UKRAINE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 09.07.2015 - 38191/12

  According to the Court's settled case-law, the existence of impartiality for the purposes of Article 6 § 1 must be determined according to (i) a subjective test, where regard must be had to the personal conviction and behaviour of a particular judge - that is, whether the judge held any personal prejudice or bias in a given case; and (ii) an objective test, that is to say by ascertaining whether the tribunal itself and, among other aspects, its composition, offered sufficient guarantees to exclude any legitimate doubt in respect of its impartiality (see, among other authorities, Fey v. Austria, 24 February 1993, §§ 28 and 30, Series A no. 255-A; Wettstein v. Switzerland, no. 33958/96, § 42, ECHR 2000-XII; Frankowicz v. Poland, no. 53025/99, § 62, 16 December 2008; Micallef, cited above, § 93; and Oleksandr Volkov v. Ukraine, no. 21722/11, § 104, ECHR 2013).
• EGMR, 19.10.2005 - 32555/96

  ROCHE c. ROYAUME-UNI

  Auszug aus EGMR, 09.07.2015 - 38191/12

  Firstly, the right at stake in both the main and the injunction proceedings should be "civil" within the autonomous meaning of that notion under Article 6 of the Convention (see, inter alia, König v. Germany, 28 June 1978, §§ 89-90, Series A no. 27; Stran Greek Refineries and Stratis Andreadis v. Greece, 9 December 1994, § 39, Series A no. 301-B; Ferrazzini v. Italy [GC], no. 44759/98, §§ 24-31, ECHR 2001-VII; and Roche v. the United Kingdom [GC], no. 32555/96, § 119, ECHR 2005-X).
• EGMR, 01.10.1982 - 8692/79

  PIERSACK v. BELGIUM

  Auszug aus EGMR, 09.07.2015 - 38191/12

  The question of a lack of impartiality under the objective test may notably arise on functional grounds, where the judge's personal conduct is not at all impugned, but where, for instance, the exercise of different functions within the judicial process by the same person (see Piersack v. Belgium, 1 October 1982, § 30 (b), Series A no. 53), or hierarchical or other links with another actor in the proceedings objectively justify misgivings as to the impartiality of the tribunal (see Kyprianou v. Cyprus [GC], no. 73797/01, § 121, ECHR 2005-XIII; and Micallef, cited above, § 97).
• EGMR, 26.10.1984 - 9186/80

  DE CUBBER v. BELGIUM

  Auszug aus EGMR, 09.07.2015 - 38191/12

  What is at stake is the confidence which the courts in a democratic society must inspire in the public (see De Cubber v. Belgium, 26 October 1984, § 26, Series A no. 86; Micallef, cited above, § 98; and Oleksandr Volkov, cited above, § 106).
• EGMR, 09.12.1994 - 13427/87

  RAFFINERIES GRECQUES STRAN ET STRATIS ANDREADIS c. GRÈCE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 09.07.2015 - 38191/12

  Firstly, the right at stake in both the main and the injunction proceedings should be "civil" within the autonomous meaning of that notion under Article 6 of the Convention (see, inter alia, König v. Germany, 28 June 1978, §§ 89-90, Series A no. 27; Stran Greek Refineries and Stratis Andreadis v. Greece, 9 December 1994, § 39, Series A no. 301-B; Ferrazzini v. Italy [GC], no. 44759/98, §§ 24-31, ECHR 2001-VII; and Roche v. the United Kingdom [GC], no. 32555/96, § 119, ECHR 2005-X).
• EGMR, 24.02.1993 - 14396/88

  FEY v. AUSTRIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 09.07.2015 - 38191/12

  According to the Court's settled case-law, the existence of impartiality for the purposes of Article 6 § 1 must be determined according to (i) a subjective test, where regard must be had to the personal conviction and behaviour of a particular judge - that is, whether the judge held any personal prejudice or bias in a given case; and (ii) an objective test, that is to say by ascertaining whether the tribunal itself and, among other aspects, its composition, offered sufficient guarantees to exclude any legitimate doubt in respect of its impartiality (see, among other authorities, Fey v. Austria, 24 February 1993, §§ 28 and 30, Series A no. 255-A; Wettstein v. Switzerland, no. 33958/96, § 42, ECHR 2000-XII; Frankowicz v. Poland, no. 53025/99, § 62, 16 December 2008; Micallef, cited above, § 93; and Oleksandr Volkov v. Ukraine, no. 21722/11, § 104, ECHR 2013).
• EGMR, 21.12.2000 - 33958/96

  WETTSTEIN v. SWITZERLAND
• EGMR, 22.09.1994 - 13839/88

  DEBLED v. BELGIUM
• EGMR - 47155/09 (anhängig)

  [ENG]
• EGMR, 03.05.2011 - 23060/07

  IMOBILIJE MARKETING D.O.O. AND DEBELIC v. CROATIA