Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  KUZMICKAJA v. LITHUANIA

  Art. 6, Art. 13 MRK
  Inadmissible (englisch)

Wird zitiert von ... (21)Neu Zitiert selbst (1)

• EGMR, 26.10.2006 - 59696/00

  KHUDOBIN v. RUSSIA

  Auszug aus EGMR, 10.06.2008 - 27968/03

  Moreover, the Court finds the present case distinguishable from other applications involving test purchases conducted by third parties acting at the behest of the police in illegal drug dealing (cf. Vanyan v. Russia, no. 53203/99, 15 December 2005; Khudobin v. Russia, no. 59696/00, §§ 128-137, ECHR 2006-... (extracts)).

• EGMR, 13.02.2024 - 42180/19

  JAKUTAVICIUS v. LITHUANIA

  The Court has previously considered different violations provided in the Lithuanian Code of Administrative Law Violations to fall either under the criminal limb of Article 6 (see Kuzmickaja v. Lithuania (dec.), no. 27968/03, 10 June 2008, and Balsyte-Lideikiene v. Lithuania, no. 72596/01, §§ 53-61, 4 November 2008; see also ? imkus v. Lithuania, no. 41788/11, §§ 41-45, 13 June 2017, which was examined under Article 4 § 1 of Protocol No. 7) or under the civil limb of that Article (see Cernius and Rinkevicius, cited above, § 50) on the basis of their nature and the applicable penalties.
• EGMR - 46227/07

  SMIRNOV v. RUSSIA

  Were the undercover agents and other witnesses who could testify on the issue of incitement heard in court and cross-examined by the defence (see Lüdi v. Switzerland, 15 June 1992, § 49, Series A no. 238; Sequeira v. Portugal (dec.), no. 73557/01, ECHR 2003-VI; Shannon v. the United Kingdom (dec.), no. 67537/01, ECHR 2004-IV, Bulfinsky, § 45, cited above; and Kuzmickaja v. Lithuania (dec.), no. 27968/03, 10 June 2008)?.
• EGMR - 48405/07

  CHALOV v. RUSSIA

  Were the undercover agents and other witnesses who could testify on the issue of incitement heard in court and cross-examined by the defence (see Lüdi v. Switzerland, 15 June 1992, § 49, Series A no. 238; Sequeira v. Portugal (dec.), no. 73557/01, ECHR 2003-VI; Shannon v. the United Kingdom (dec.), no. 67537/01, ECHR 2004-IV, Bulfinsky, § 45, cited above; and Kuzmickaja v. Lithuania (dec.), no. 27968/03, 10 June 2008)?.

 
• EGMR - 54449/07

  ROGOV v. RUSSIA

  Were the undercover agents and other witnesses who could testify on the issue of incitement heard in court and cross-examined by the defence (see Lüdi v. Switzerland, 15 June 1992, § 49, Series A no. 238; Sequeira v. Portugal (dec.), no. 73557/01, ECHR 2003-VI; Shannon v. the United Kingdom (dec.), no. 67537/01, ECHR 2004-IV, Bulfinsky, § 45, cited above; and Kuzmickaja v. Lithuania (dec.), no. 27968/03, 10 June 2008)?.
• EGMR - 42616/08 (anhängig)

  SAZONOV v. RUSSIA

  Were the undercover agents and other witnesses who could testify on the issue of incitement heard in court and cross-examined by the defence (see Lüdi v. Switzerland, 15 June 1992, § 49, Series A no. 238; Sequeira v. Portugal (dec.), no. 73557/01, ECHR 2003-VI; Shannon v. the United Kingdom (dec.), no. 67537/01, ECHR 2004-IV, Bulfinsky, § 45, cited above; and Kuzmickaja v. Lithuania (dec.), no. 27968/03, 10 June 2008)?.
• EGMR - 43089/07

  CHERKASOVA v. RUSSIA

  Were the undercover agents and other witnesses who could testify on the issue of incitement heard in court and cross-examined by the defence (see Lüdi v. Switzerland, 15 June 1992, § 49, Series A no. 238; Sequeira v. Portugal (dec.), no. 73557/01, ECHR 2003-VI; Shannon v. the United Kingdom (dec.), no. 67537/01, ECHR 2004-IV, Bulfinsky, § 45, cited above; and Kuzmickaja v. Lithuania (dec.), no. 27968/03, 10 June 2008)?.
• EGMR - 55519/09 (anhängig)

  VALEYEV v. RUSSIA

  Were the undercover agents and other witnesses who could testify on the issue of incitement heard in court and cross-examined by the defence (see Lüdi v. Switzerland, 15 June 1992, § 49, Series A no. 238; Sequeira v. Portugal (dec.), no. 73557/01, ECHR 2003-VI; Shannon v. the United Kingdom (dec.), no. 67537/01, ECHR 2004-IV, Bulfinsky, § 45, cited above; and Kuzmickaja v. Lithuania (dec.), no. 27968/03, 10 June 2008)?.
• EGMR - 52651/07

  BEREZIN v. RUSSIA

  Were the undercover agents and other witnesses who could testify on the issue of incitement heard in court and cross-examined by the defence (see Lüdi v. Switzerland, 15 June 1992, § 49, Series A no. 238; Sequeira v. Portugal (dec.), no. 73557/01, ECHR 2003-VI; Shannon v. the United Kingdom (dec.), no. 67537/01, ECHR 2004-IV, Bulfinsky, § 45, cited above; and Kuzmickaja v. Lithuania (dec.), no. 27968/03, 10 June 2008)?.
• EGMR - 54706/07

  KRIVDA v. RUSSIA

  Were the undercover agents and other witnesses who could testify on the issue of incitement heard in court and cross-examined by the defence (see Lüdi v. Switzerland, 15 June 1992, § 49, Series A no. 238; Sequeira v. Portugal (dec.), no. 73557/01, ECHR 2003-VI; Shannon v. the United Kingdom (dec.), no. 67537/01, ECHR 2004-IV, Bulfinsky, § 45, cited above; and Kuzmickaja v. Lithuania (dec.), no. 27968/03, 10 June 2008)?.
• EGMR - 10192/09 (anhängig)

  IVANTSOV v. RUSSIA

  Were the undercover agents and other witnesses who could testify on the issue of incitement heard in court and cross-examined by the defence (see Lüdi v. Switzerland, 15 June 1992, § 49, Series A no. 238; Sequeira v. Portugal (dec.), no. 73557/01, ECHR 2003-VI; Shannon v. the United Kingdom (dec.), no. 67537/01, ECHR 2004-IV, Bulfinsky, § 45, cited above; and Kuzmickaja v. Lithuania (dec.), no. 27968/03, 10 June 2008)?.
• EGMR - 5608/09 (anhängig)

  SALIKHOV v. RUSSIA
• EGMR - 22504/06

  ANTONOV v. RUSSIA
• EGMR - 6193/07

  MORDVINOV v. RUSSIA
• EGMR - 6226/07

  FRANTSUZOV v. RUSSIA
• EGMR - 18561/09 (anhängig)

  MANYAKHIN v. RUSSIA
• EGMR - 13746/09 (anhängig)

  FEDOROV v. RUSSIA
• EGMR - 52131/09 (anhängig)

  MUJAJ v. ALBANIA
• EGMR, 10.05.2016 - 56459/07

  LUKACSFY c. ROUMANIE
• EGMR - 48809/07

  MAKAROV v. RUSSIA
• EGMR - 18589/07

  KUZNETSOV v. RUSSIA
• EGMR - 7716/09 (anhängig)

  DIMITRIYEV v. RUSSIA