Rechtsprechung
EGMR, 11.01.2018 - 4306/12, 62393/12, 6506/15, 24194/15, 40554/15, 10749/17, 29880/17 |
Zitiervorschläge
EGMR, 11.01.2018 - 4306/12, 62393/12, 6506/15, 24194/15, 40554/15, 10749/17, 29880/17 (https://dejure.org/2018,94)
EGMR, Entscheidung vom 11.01.2018 - 4306/12, 62393/12, 6506/15, 24194/15, 40554/15, 10749/17, 29880/17 (https://dejure.org/2018,94)
EGMR, Entscheidung vom 11. Januar 2018 - 4306/12, 62393/12, 6506/15, 24194/15, 40554/15, 10749/17, 29880/17 (https://dejure.org/2018,94)
Tipp: Um den Kurzlink (hier: https://dejure.org/2018,94) schnell in die Zwischenablage zu kopieren, können Sie die Tastenkombination Alt + R verwenden - auch ohne diesen Bereich zu öffnen.
Volltextveröffentlichung
- Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte
KARINGTON AND OTHERS v. UKRAINE
Violation of Article 6 - Right to a fair trial (Article 6 - Criminal proceedings;Article 6-1 - Reasonable time);Violation of Article 13+6-1 - Right to an effective remedy (Article 13 - Effective remedy) (Article 6 - Right to a fair trial;Criminal ...
Wird zitiert von ... (0) Neu Zitiert selbst (2)
- EGMR, 25.03.1999 - 25444/94
PÉLISSIER AND SASSI v. FRANCE
Auszug aus EGMR, 11.01.2018 - 4306/12
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 applicants and the relevant authorities and what was at stake for the applicants in the dispute (see, among many other authorities, Pélissier and Sassi v. France [GC], no. 25444/94, § 67, ECHR 1999-II, and Frydlender v. France [GC], no. 30979/96, § 43, ECHR 2000-VII). - EGMR, 27.06.2000 - 30979/96
FRYDLENDER c. FRANCE
Auszug aus EGMR, 11.01.2018 - 4306/12
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 applicants and the relevant authorities and what was at stake for the applicants in the dispute (see, among many other authorities, Pélissier and Sassi v. France [GC], no. 25444/94, § 67, ECHR 1999-II, and Frydlender v. France [GC], no. 30979/96, § 43, ECHR 2000-VII).