Rechtsprechung
| EGMR, 11.04.2017 - 58049/11 |
Zitiervorschläge
Tipp: Um den Kurzlink (hier: https://dejure.org/2017,10133) schnell in die Zwischenablage zu kopieren, können Sie die Tastenkombination Alt + R verwenden - auch ohne diesen Bereich zu öffnen.
Volltextveröffentlichung
- Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte
BERGER v. AUSTRIA
Violation of Article 6 - Right to a fair trial (Article 6 - Criminal proceedings;Article 6-1 - Reasonable time) (englisch)
Wird zitiert von ... (0) Neu Zitiert selbst (3)
- EGMR, 25.03.1999 - 25444/94
PÉLISSIER AND SASSI v. FRANCE
Auszug aus EGMR, 11.04.2017 - 58049/11
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 applicant's conduct and the conduct of the competent authorities (see, among many other authorities, Pélissier and Sassi v. France [GC], no. 25444/94, § 67, ECHR 1999-II). - EGMR, 30.01.2001 - 23459/94
HOLZINGER c. AUTRICHE (N° 1)
Auszug aus EGMR, 11.04.2017 - 58049/11
The Court further recalls that in the case of Holzinger v. Austria (No. 1) (no. 23459/94, § 24-25, ECHR 2001-I, relating to civil proceedings; see also Talirz v. Austria (dec.), no. 37323/97, 11 September 2001, relating to criminal proceedings) it found that a request under section 91 of the Court Act is, in principle, an effective remedy which has to be used in respect of complaints about the length of court proceedings. - EGMR, 30.01.2001 - 28898/95
HOLZINGER v. AUSTRIA (No. 2)
Auszug aus EGMR, 11.04.2017 - 58049/11
Thus, where proceedings include a substantial period during which the applicant has no remedy to expedite them at his or her disposal, a request under section 91 cannot be considered an effective remedy (see, mutatis mutandis, Holzinger (no. 2) v. Austria, no. 28898/95, § 21-22, ECHR 2001-I).