Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  PLESHKOV v. UKRAINE

  Art. 5, Art. 5 Abs. 3, Art. 5 Abs. 4, Art. 6, Art. 6 Abs. 1, Art. 41 MRK
  Remainder inadmissible Violation of Art. 5-3 Violation of Art. 5-4 Violation of Art. 6-1 Pecuniary damage - claim dismissed Non-pecuniary damage - award (englisch)

Verfahrensgang

• EGMR, 07.07.2009 - 37789/05
• EGMR, 10.02.2011 - 37789/05
• EGMR - 37789/05

Wird zitiert von ...Neu Zitiert selbst (6)

• EGMR, 25.03.1999 - 25444/94

  PÉLISSIER AND SASSI v. FRANCE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 10.02.2011 - 37789/05

  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 following criteria: the complexity of the case, the conduct of the applicant and the relevant authorities (see, among many other references, Pélissier and Sassi v. France [GC], no. 25444/94, § 67, ECHR 1999-II).
• EGMR, 24.07.2003 - 46133/99

  SMIRNOVA c. RUSSIE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 10.02.2011 - 37789/05

  The Court agrees with the Government's view concerning the period to be taken into consideration, as indeed the time when the applicant absconded (see paragraph 23 above) should be excluded from the overall length of the proceedings (see Girolami v. Italy, 19 February 1991, § 13, Series A no. 196-E, and Smirnova v. Russia, nos. 46133/99 and 48183/99, § 81, ECHR 2003-IX (extracts)).
• EGMR, 02.03.2006 - 55669/00

  NAKHMANOVICH v. RUSSIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 10.02.2011 - 37789/05

  It further notes that an accused in criminal proceedings should be entitled to have his case conducted with special diligence, especially where he is kept in custody (see Nakhmanovich v. Russia, no. 55669/00, § 89, 2 March 2006).

 
• EGMR, 27.06.1968 - 1936/63

  Neumeister ./. Österreich

  Auszug aus EGMR, 10.02.2011 - 37789/05

  Such an attempt to assure a thorough and elaborate investigation should be found compatible with good administration of justice, as "a concern for speed cannot dispense... judges in the system of criminal procedure... from taking every measure likely to throw light on the truth or falsehood of the charges" (see Neumeister v. Austria, 27 June 1968, p. 43, § 21, Series A no. 8).
• EGMR, 08.06.1995 - 16419/90

  YAGCI AND SARGIN v. TURKEY

  Auszug aus EGMR, 10.02.2011 - 37789/05

  The Court reiterates that, according to its well-established case-law, a person charged with an offence must always be released pending trial unless the State can show that there are "relevant and sufficient" reasons to justify the continued detention (see Wemhoff v. Germany, 27 June 1968, § 12, Series A no. 7, and YaÄ?cı and Sargın v. Turkey, 8 June 1995, § 52, Series A no. 319-A).
• EGMR, 27.06.1968 - 2122/64

  Wemhoff ./. Deutschland

  Auszug aus EGMR, 10.02.2011 - 37789/05

  The Court reiterates that, according to its well-established case-law, a person charged with an offence must always be released pending trial unless the State can show that there are "relevant and sufficient" reasons to justify the continued detention (see Wemhoff v. Germany, 27 June 1968, § 12, Series A no. 7, and YaÄ?cı and Sargın v. Turkey, 8 June 1995, § 52, Series A no. 319-A).

• EGMR, 28.08.2012 - 24605/06

  CHERNYSHENKO v. UKRAINE

  The circumstances of this case are similar to those examined in the judgment concerning the case Pleshkov v. Ukraine (no. 37789/05, 10 February 2011), as they concern the same criminal proceedings against both the applicant and Mr Pleshkov (see §§ 6-19 of the cited judgment).