Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  BAJIC v. NORTH MACEDONIA

  No violation of Article 6 - Right to a fair trial (Article 6 - Criminal proceedings;Article 6-1 - Fair hearing);Violation of Article 6 - Right to a fair trial (Article 6 - Criminal proceedings;Article 6-1 - Fair hearing;Adversarial trial;Equality of arms);No ...

Sonstiges

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte (Verfahrensmitteilung)

  BAJIC v. THE FORMER YUGOSLAV REPUBLIC OF MACEDONIA

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

Wird zitiert von ... (0)Neu Zitiert selbst (8)

• EGMR, 19.04.1994 - 16034/90

  VAN DE HURK v. THE NETHERLANDS

  Auszug aus EGMR, 10.06.2021 - 2833/13

  The Court further observes that although Article 6 § 1 obliges courts to give reasons for their decisions, it cannot be understood as requiring a detailed answer to every argument (see Van de Hurk v. the Netherlands, 19 April 1994, § 61, Series A no. 288).
• EGMR, 29.06.2007 - 25624/02

  Auszug aus EGMR, 10.06.2021 - 2833/13

  15809/02 and 25624/02, § 55, ECHR 2007-III; and Bykov v. Russia [GC], no. 4378/02, § 92, 10 March 2009).
• EGMR, 18.02.2010 - 39660/02

  Recht auf konkreten und wirksamen Verteidigerbeistand bei der ersten Vernehmung …

  Auszug aus EGMR, 10.06.2021 - 2833/13

  Their rationale lies, inter alia, in the protection of the accused against improper compulsion by the authorities, thereby contributing to the avoidance of miscarriages of justice and to the fulfilment of the aims of Article 6 (see Aleksandr Zaichenko v. Russia, no. 39660/02, § 38, 18 February 2010).

 
• EGMR, 29.06.2007 - 15809/02

  Recht auf ein faires Verfahren und Selbstbelastungsfreiheit (Kriterien für eine …

  Auszug aus EGMR, 10.06.2021 - 2833/13

  15809/02 and 25624/02, § 55, ECHR 2007-III; and Bykov v. Russia [GC], no. 4378/02, § 92, 10 March 2009).
• EGMR, 20.04.2006 - 15056/02

  MILOSEVIC v.

  Auszug aus EGMR, 10.06.2021 - 2833/13

  Regard being had to the documents in its possession and to its case-law as to the costs and expenses claimed in respect of the domestic proceedings, the Court notes that such costs were not incurred in order to seek through the domestic legal order prevention and redress of the particular violation found by the Court, namely the Supreme Court's failure to provide the applicant with a possibility to comment on the prosecutor's observations submitted to it (see Milosevic v. the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, no. 15056/02, § 34, 20 April 2006).
• EGMR, 10.03.2009 - 4378/02

  Recht auf ein faires Verfahren (heimliche Ermittlungsmethoden; Umgehungsverbot; …

  Auszug aus EGMR, 10.06.2021 - 2833/13

  15809/02 and 25624/02, § 55, ECHR 2007-III; and Bykov v. Russia [GC], no. 4378/02, § 92, 10 March 2009).
• EGMR, 16.06.2015 - 41269/08

  SCHMID-LAFFER c. SUISSE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 10.06.2021 - 2833/13

  In order to determine whether a particular set of proceedings has destroyed the very substance of the right not to contribute to one's own incrimination, the Court must examine the nature and degree of the coercion, if any, the existence of appropriate guarantees in the procedure and the use made of the material thus obtained (see Schmid-Laffer v. Switzerland, no. 41269/08, § 38, 16 June 2015).
• EGMR, 18.05.2004 - 58148/00

  ÉDITIONS PLON c. FRANCE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 10.06.2021 - 2833/13

  According to the Court's case-law, an applicant is entitled to the reimbursement of costs and expenses only in so far as it has been shown that these have been actually and necessarily incurred and are reasonable as to quantum (see Editions Plon v. France, no. 58148/00, § 64, ECHR 2004-IV).