Rechtsprechung
| EGMR, 10.04.2003 - 43454/98 |
Zitiervorschläge
Tipp: Um den Kurzlink (hier: https://dejure.org/2003,25766) schnell in die Zwischenablage zu kopieren, können Sie die Tastenkombination Alt + R verwenden - auch ohne diesen Bereich zu öffnen.
Volltextveröffentlichungen (2)
- Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte
BAKKER v. AUSTRIA
Art. 6, Art. 6 Abs. 1, Art. 41 MRK
Violation of Art. 6-1 Pecuniary damage - claim dismissed Non-pecuniary damage - finding of violation sufficient Costs and expenses - domestic proceedings - claim dismissed Costs and expenses partial award - Convention proceedings (englisch) - Österreichisches Institut für Menschenrechte
(englisch)
Kurzfassungen/Presse
- RIS Bundeskanzleramt Österreich (Ausführliche Zusammenfassung)
Verfahrensgang
- EGMR, 13.06.2002 - 43454/98
- EGMR, 10.04.2003 - 43454/98
Wird zitiert von ... (0) Neu Zitiert selbst (5)
- EGMR, 24.06.1993 - 14518/89
SCHULER-ZGRAGGEN c. SUISSE
Auszug aus EGMR, 10.04.2003 - 43454/98
He had in his complaints to the Administrative Court requested an oral hearing and there is nothing to show that the subject matter of the dispute was of such a nature, for instance a highly technical issue, that it was better dealt with in written proceedings (see Schuler-Zgraggen v. Switzerland, judgment of 24 June 1993, Series A no. 263, p. 20, § 58; mutatis mutandis Göç v. Turkey [GC], no. 36590/97, §§ 51-52, ECHR 2002-). - EGMR, 23.06.1994 - 16997/90
DE MOOR c. BELGIQUE
Auszug aus EGMR, 10.04.2003 - 43454/98
It is not in dispute that Article 6 is applicable to the present case, as proceedings on the admission to exercise a profession involve the determination of a civil right (see De Moor v. Belgium, judgment of 23 June 1994, Series A no. 292-A, §§ 42-47). - EGMR, 21.02.1990 - 11855/85
H?KANSSON AND STURESSON v. SWEDEN
Auszug aus EGMR, 10.04.2003 - 43454/98
The applicant was in principle entitled to an oral hearing in the course of the proceedings on his request for authorisation to exercise his profession (see Håkansson and Sturesson v. Sweden, judgment of 21 February 1990, Series A no. 171, p. 20, § 64). - EGMR, 26.04.1995 - 16922/90
FISCHER c. AUTRICHE
Auszug aus EGMR, 10.04.2003 - 43454/98
The Court observes at the outset that the administrative authorities, the Regional Governor and the Ministry for Health and Consumer Protection, are not "tribunals" within the meaning of Article 6. Only the Administrative Court and the Constitutional Court could qualify as "tribunals" (see Fischer v. Austria, judgment of 26 April 1995, Series A no. 312, pp. 20-21, § 44; Pauger v. Austria, judgment of 28 May 1997, Reports 1997-III). - EGMR, 20.05.1999 - 21980/93
BLADET TROMSØ ET STENSAAS c. NORVEGE
Auszug aus EGMR, 10.04.2003 - 43454/98
The Court recalls that, according to its case-law, it has to consider whether the costs and expenses were actually and necessarily incurred in order to prevent or obtain redress for the matter found to constitute a violation of the Convention and were reasonable as to quantum (see, for instance, Bladet Tromsø and Stensaas v. Norway [GC], no. 21980/93, § 80, ECHR 1999-III).