Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  SVETLANA NAUMENKO v. UKRAINE

  Art. 6, Art. 6 Abs. 1, Art. 41, Protokoll Nr. 1 Art. 1, Protokoll Nr. 1 Art. 1 Abs. 1 MRK
  Violation of Art. 6-1 with regard to the length of the proceedings Violation of Art. 6-1 with regard to the right to a court Violation of Art. 6-1 with regard to impartiality Pecuniary damage - claim dismissed Non-pecuniary damage - financial award Costs and ...

Verfahrensgang

• EGMR, 14.10.2003 - 41984/98
• EGMR, 09.11.2004 - 41984/98

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

• EGMR, 08.11.2005 - 56918/00

  LESHCHENKO AND TOLYUPA v. UKRAINE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 09.11.2004 - 41984/98

  Nevertheless, it may take note of the stage reached in the proceedings prior to 11 September 1997 when examining the complaint as a whole (see, Leshchenko and Tolyupa v. Ukraine (dec.), no. 56918/00, 6 April 2004; Sovtransavto Holding v. Ukraine, no. 48553/99, § 57, ECHR 2002-VII).
• EGMR, 09.12.1994 - 13427/87

  RAFFINERIES GRECQUES STRAN ET STRATIS ANDREADIS c. GRÈCE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 09.11.2004 - 41984/98

  The applicant therefore had an enforceable claim within the meaning of Article 1 of Protocol No. 1, which constituted a "possession" within the meaning of that provision (see Stran Greek Refineries and Stratis Andreadis v. Greece, judgment of 9 December 1994, Series A no. 301-B, § 59 etc).

• EGMR, 31.05.2007 - 6725/03

  LIZANETS v. UKRAINE

  In assessing the domestic judicial practices against their compatibility with the principle of legal certainty the Court primarily focused on the extraordinary review proceedings susceptible to undermine the finality of court judgments (cf., Popov v. Moldova (no. 2), no. 19960/04, § 52, 6 December 2005, Tregubenko v. Ukraine, no. 61333/00, § 36, 2 November 2004, Ryabykh v. Russia, no. 52854/99, § 57, ECHR 2003-IX and Svetlana Naumenko v. Ukraine, no. 41984/98, § 92, 9 November 2004).
• EGMR, 21.02.2017 - 47753/15

  FROLOV v. UKRAINE

  The Court has established in a number of cases, including those brought against Ukraine, its practice concerning complaints about the violation of one's right to a hearing within a reasonable time (see, for example, Frydlender v. France [GC], no. 30979/96, §§ 43 and 45, ECHR 2000-VII; Majewski v. Poland, no. 52690/99, 11 October 2005; Svetlana Naumenko v. Ukraine, no. 41984/98, 9 November 2004 and Efimenko v. Ukraine, no. 55870/00, 18 July 2006).